Bellington v. Bryant

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Bellington v. Bryant

165 S.E. 890, 45 Ga. App. 771, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 698

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 24, 1932

Docket21847

StatusPublished

This text of 165 S.E. 890 (Bellington v. Bryant) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bellington v. Bryant, 165 S.E. 890, 45 Ga. App. 771, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 698 (Ga. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

Whether or not, under section 3366, subsection 6, of the Civil Code of 1910, which provides that in order to arrest the proceedings and form an issue upon a foreclosure of a laborer’s lien the defendant in execution “may file his affidavit of the fact, . , whfqh [772]*772affidavit shall form an issue to be returned to the court and tried as other causes,” the affidavit must be filed with the levying officer, the affidavit nevertheless must be returned to the court out of which the execution issued. It was a sufficient return of such a counter-affidavit that it was filed with the court and the levying officer immediately notified, and when the case was called for trial upon the issue made by the filing of the affidavit, no sale of the property under the execution had taken place. The filing of the affidavit under the circumstances was a substantial compliance with any requirement, if any, that it be filed with the levying officer. This ruling is distinguishable from the rulings made in Wilson v. Griffin, 22 Ga. App. 451 (96 S. E. 395), and Harvey v. Johnson, 28 Ga. App. 287 (111 S. E. 576). The court did not err in overruling the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the counter-affidavit.

Decided September 24, 1932. E. T. Golightly, lor plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Sutton, J. concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Stephens, J.

Whether or not, under section 3366, subsection 6, of the Civil Code of 1910, which provides that in order to arrest the proceedings and form an issue upon a foreclosure of a laborer’s lien the defendant in execution “may file his affidavit of the fact, . , whfqh [772]*772affidavit shall form an issue to be returned to the court and tried as other causes,” the affidavit must be filed with the levying officer, the affidavit nevertheless must be returned to the court out of which the execution issued. It was a sufficient return of such a counter-affidavit that it was filed with the court and the levying officer immediately notified, and when the case was called for trial upon the issue made by the filing of the affidavit, no sale of the property under the execution had taken place. The filing of the affidavit under the circumstances was a substantial compliance with any requirement, if any, that it be filed with the levying officer. This ruling is distinguishable from the rulings made in Wilson v. Griffin, 22 Ga. App. 451 (96 S. E. 395), and Harvey v. Johnson, 28 Ga. App. 287 (111 S. E. 576). The court did not err in overruling the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the counter-affidavit.

Decided September 24, 1932. E. T. Golightly, lor plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Sutton, J. concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 S.E. 890, 45 Ga. App. 771, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bellington-v-bryant-gactapp-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack