Byrd & Co. v. Interstate Chemical Co.
This text of 91 S.E. 578 (Byrd & Co. v. Interstate Chemical Co.) 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.
Opinion
The defendant in execution having failed to make the sheriff of the county a party to the traverse, of the entry of service (Civil Code, § 5566),-and having failed to give the sheriff any notice whatever thereof, the entry of service appearing to haye been made by a deputy sheriff, who was made a party, the illegality proceeding could have had no other legal termination than in favor of the defendant in error. Georgia Railway & Power Co. v. Davis, 14 Ga. App. 790 (82 S. E. 387); Rawlings v. Brown, 15 Ga. App. 162 (3), 164 (82 S. E. 803); Citizens Bank of Bainbridge v. Fort, 15 Ga. App. 427 (83 S. E. 678) ; Southern States Phosphate & Fertilizer Co. v. Clark, ante, 376. While this fatal defect should properly have been reached by a timely motion to strike the traverse, yet under the facts of the case the court did not err in directing, upon motion, a verdict for the plaintiff in execution and against the affidavit of illegality. .
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
91 S.E. 578, 19 Ga. App. 412, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/byrd-co-v-interstate-chemical-co-gactapp-1917.