Gill v. Middleton

29 S.W. 465, 60 Ark. 213, 1895 Ark. LEXIS 145
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedJanuary 26, 1895
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 29 S.W. 465 (Gill v. Middleton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gill v. Middleton, 29 S.W. 465, 60 Ark. 213, 1895 Ark. LEXIS 145 (Ark. 1895).

Opinion

Wood, J.

The appellee instituted garnishment proceedings against the appellant, as administrator, before a justice of the peace, and obtained judgment. This judgment was presented to the probate court for allowance and classification against the estate of which appellant was the administrator. The claim was disallowed, and the appellee appealed to the circuit court, where he obtained judgment, from which this appeal was prosecuted.

An administrator is not subject to garnishment. The proceedings before the justice — the basis of this, action — were coram non judice, and void. Fowler v. McClelland, 5 Ark. 188; Thorn v. Woodruff, 5 Ark. 55; Const. Ark. art. 7, sec. 34; 8 Am. & Eng. Enc. of Law, 1138; Drake on Attachments, sec. 492 et seq.; 2 Wade on Att. sec. 425, 426; Kneeland on Att. sec. 416.

Reversed, and judgment here for appellant.

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

Related

Forehand v. American Collection Service, Inc.
819 S.W.2d 282 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1991)
Galion Iron Works & Manufacturing Co. v. Russell
167 F. Supp. 304 (W.D. Arkansas, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 S.W. 465, 60 Ark. 213, 1895 Ark. LEXIS 145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gill-v-middleton-ark-1895.