Bonds v. Garvey

39 So. 492, 87 Miss. 335
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1905·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Whitfield, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

There is no provision in the statute regulating attachments in chancery requiring the complainant to give bond as is required in respect to a plaintiff in attachments at law; nor is there any pro[337]*337vision in the statute law on the subject authorizing a chancery court to allow damages by way of attorneys’ fees, etc., in attachments in chancery. The whole matter of damages in attachment proceedings is purely statutory, and in the absence of a statute providing therefor we do not think the court was correct in allowing the damages in this case. See Stauffer v. Garrison, 61 Miss., 67, and other authorities cited by counsel for appellant.

The action of the chancellor on the merits -was correct; hut for the error indicated the decree is reversed, and a decree will he entered here dismissing the hill at the costs of the complainant. 8o ordered.

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

Bonds v. Garvey, 39 So. 492, 87 Miss. 335 (Mich. 1905).

39 So. 492 (Bonds v. Garvey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Burt v. Roberts
55 So. 2d 164 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1951)
Beloit v. Green
251 P. 621 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1926)
I. B. Rowell & Co. v. Sandifer
91 So. 899 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1922)
D. Rosenbaum's Sons v. Davis & Andrews Co.
71 So. 388 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1916)