Oliver v. State
Supreme Court of Georgia
Practice in the Superior Court. Supersedeas. Money rule. Before Judge WRIGHT. Decatur Superior Court. May term, 1880. To the report contained in the decision it is only necessary to add the following: To the motion to enter judgment on the supersedeas bond, Oliver filed objections, from which it appeared that the fund over which the contest was had, as in the sheriff’s hands, was never in fact paid that Oliver had bid in the property at the sale under hi& fi. fa., but after…
Read the full summary
Practice in the Superior Court. Supersedeas. Money rule. Before Judge WRIGHT. Decatur Superior Court. May term, 1880. To the report contained in the decision it is only necessary to add the following: To the motion to enter judgment on the supersedeas bond, Oliver filed objections, from which it appeared that the fund over which the contest was had, as in the sheriff’s hands, was never in fact paid that Oliver had bid in the property at the sale under hi& fi. fa., but after notice had been served upon the sheriff by the attorneys representing the contesting fi. fa., the sale was never…
1Opinion of the Court
Speer, Justice.
It appears from the record in this case that one McAffee obtained a judgment against Hampton as principal, Oliver (the plaintiff in error) as security, and Davis as indorser; that subsequent to the rendering of the judgment Oliver purchased and took control of the same, and had •the same levied on a certain house and lot in Decatur as the property of Hampton, th.e principal in said fi.fa.; that the same was exposed to sale on the first Tuesday in November, 1878, and bid off by Oliver for the sum of four hundred and seventy-five dollars; that at or soon after said sale,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Franklin v. KriegshaberSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Barlow v. Toole, McGarrah & TondeeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1887