Legal Opinion · Dissent

First National Bank v. Dimmick

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided May 1, 1912Published

Appeal from Montgomery City Court. Heard before Hon. W. H. Thomas. The First National Bank had judgment against the • Montgomery Iron Works, and in aid thereof procured garnishment to issue and be served upon J. W. Dim-mick. From a judgment for the garnishee plaintiff appeals.

1DissentMayfield, J.

(dissenting.) — I cannot concur in the opinion or conclusion in this case. I think this decision makes a radical departure from the practice and procedure in garnishment cases which has prevailed in this state for nearly 100 years. The abstract questions decided are: First, that the ansAver of the garnishee, if in AATiting and marked “Filed” by the clerk, ipso facto, becomes a part of the record, without any action on the part of the court; and second, that an oral answer of a garnishee cannot be contested. I think both propositions equally Avrong, and each is as wrong as Avrong can be,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Gunn v. HowellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1855
  2. Bland v. BowieSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
  3. Jefferson County Savings Bank v. NathanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1903
  4. Lewis v. Dubose & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1856
  5. Lehman, Durr & Co. v. Hudmon Bros.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1885

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API