Rogers v. Silas
Supreme Court of Georgia
Constitutional Law. Buie versus Sheriffs. Slave-debts. Before Judge Andrews. Hancock Superior Court. June, 1869. Bebecca Silas et al. had a fi. fa. against Stacy et al., but upon what judgment it was founded, or when it was issued, do not appear. The sheriff sold certain of defendants' property, and paid out the money to other fi. fas. He was ruled to show cause why he should not pay this fi. fa.
Read the full summary
Constitutional Law. Buie versus Sheriffs. Slave-debts. Before Judge Andrews. Hancock Superior Court. June, 1869. Bebecca Silas et al. had a fi. fa. against Stacy et al., but upon what judgment it was founded, or when it was issued, do not appear. The sheriff sold certain of defendants' property, and paid out the money to other fi. fas. He was ruled to show cause why he should not pay this fi. fa. He answered that, though he had it in hand, he had overlooked it, and, besides, that he was prepared to show that it was issued from a judgment founded upon a contract, the consideration of which was…
1Opinion of the CourtLochrane, C. J.
The record in this case is very brief; in fact, too brief for the proper understanding of the history of the case. It appears that, at the April Term, 1869, the defendant in error, by rule nisi, called upon Rogers, sheriff, to show cause why money had not been collected. The rule does not show when the fi. fa. was obtained, but merely recites its existence; and to this proceeding the sheriff's answer alleges that the fi. fa. in question, issued upon a judgment founded on a consideration for negro property.
We have been restrained, in this case, to consider whether, when a fi. fa., issued from…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Holbrook v. James H. Prichard Motor Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1921