F. C. Taylor & Co. v. Hughes

Supreme Court of Georgia

F. C. Taylor & Co. v. Hughes

27 Ga. 224

DecidedJanuary 15, 1859

StatusPublished

This text of 27 Ga. 224 (F. C. Taylor & Co. v. Hughes) 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

F. C. Taylor & Co. v. Hughes, 27 Ga. 224 (Ga. 1859).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

Lumpkin J.

delivering the opinion.

The complaint in this case is, that the debtor gave notice, in terms of the Acts of 1801 and 1809, that he would apply to the Court, at its next Term, for an order appointing a time to hear the application of the insolvent for his discharge; and that consequently, he was not entitled to move instanter to take the oath, under the Act of 1823.

When the case was reached, and called in its order, the debtor moved to be admitted to take the benefit of the Honest Debtors’Act. The creditor had received ample notice, and was present by his counsel in Court. He did not ask for time, or the appointment of a future day, to file objections to the application. If he had, and stated that he was sur[226]*226prised by the form of the notice, and by reason thereof was not prepared to contest the motion, or show cause against it, time no doubt would have been allowed for that purpose.

The law, we think, has been substantially complied with. And the insolvent debtors Acts should be liberally construed in favor of liberty.

Judgment affirmed.

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

By the Court.

Lumpkin J.

delivering the opinion.

The complaint in this case is, that the debtor gave notice, in terms of the Acts of 1801 and 1809, that he would apply to the Court, at its next Term, for an order appointing a time to hear the application of the insolvent for his discharge; and that consequently, he was not entitled to move instanter to take the oath, under the Act of 1823.

When the case was reached, and called in its order, the debtor moved to be admitted to take the benefit of the Honest Debtors’Act. The creditor had received ample notice, and was present by his counsel in Court. He did not ask for time, or the appointment of a future day, to file objections to the application. If he had, and stated that he was sur[226]*226prised by the form of the notice, and by reason thereof was not prepared to contest the motion, or show cause against it, time no doubt would have been allowed for that purpose.

The law, we think, has been substantially complied with. And the insolvent debtors Acts should be liberally construed in favor of liberty.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 Ga. 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/f-c-taylor-co-v-hughes-ga-1859.