Ensel v. Adler

Supreme Court of Georgia

Ensel v. Adler

35 S.E. 334, 110 Ga. 326, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 427

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 2, 1900

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 35 S.E. 334 (Ensel v. Adler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ensel v. Adler, 35 S.E. 334, 110 Ga. 326, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 427 (Ga. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Cobb, J.

Applying the rule laid down in the case of Oliver v. Macon Hardware Company, 98 Ga. 249, to the facts disclosed by the present record, the plaintiff in error, who was a general salesman in a clothing establishment, was not a laborer whose wages were exempt from the process of garnishment; and accordingly the verdict against him upon this point was right, and the superior court did not err in Refusing to disturb it. Hunter v. Morgan, 108 Ga. 409; Boynton v, Pelham, 108 Ga. 794.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Cobb, J.

Applying the rule laid down in the case of Oliver v. Macon Hardware Company, 98 Ga. 249, to the facts disclosed by the present record, the plaintiff in error, who was a general salesman in a clothing establishment, was not a laborer whose wages were exempt from the process of garnishment; and accordingly the verdict against him upon this point was right, and the superior court did not err in Refusing to disturb it. Hunter v. Morgan, 108 Ga. 409; Boynton v, Pelham, 108 Ga. 794.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 S.E. 334, 110 Ga. 326, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ensel-v-adler-ga-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack