Hartley v. White
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Susquehanna county: Of July Term 1878, No. 43. Attachment-execution by Norman White and D. K. Morss, assignee of said Norman White, against M. J. Decker and Andrew Halstead, defendants, and Silas Hartley, garnishee. Service was had on Halstead, one of defendants, and Hartley. A rule was taken on the garnishee to take interrogatories, who filed answers and the same day pleaded “ nulla bona.”
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Susquehanna county: Of July Term 1878, No. 43. Attachment-execution by Norman White and D. K. Morss, assignee of said Norman White, against M. J. Decker and Andrew Halstead, defendants, and Silas Hartley, garnishee. Service was had on Halstead, one of defendants, and Hartley. A rule was taken on the garnishee to take interrogatories, who filed answers and the same day pleaded “ nulla bona.” At the trial, it appeared that in 1870 Decker & Halstead were in partnership in the mill and lumbering business, and about that time borrowed $2000 from White for the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Mercur
This judgment was entered on a special. verdict. It does not present the facts in a clear and methodical manner. It is not a model to be followed. It may, however, be sufficient to sustain a judgment. The plaintiff in error was served as garnishee of Decker & Halstead, copartners. The jury found that, in fraud of the creditors of the firm, and without the knowledge or consent of Decker, except as to one note (shown by the evidence to be about $40), Halstead assigned and transferred judgments and notes, the property of the firm, amounting to about $2000, to the garnishee; that the transfer of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Wherry ex rel. Rosensteel v. WherrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- First Tennessee Production Credit Ass'n v. DavisTennessee Supreme Court · 1988