Goode v. Holcombe

37 Ala. 94
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided June 15, 1860·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

R. W. WALTER, J.

To authorize a final judgment against a garnishee, who has not answered, a judgment nisi must be first entered against-him, and then a scire facias issued thereupon, must be executed and returned j or two such notices must be returned “not found” by tbe sheriff of the county in which tbe garnishment was executed, Code, § 2545; Lowry v. Clements, 9 Ala. 422; Wood v. Russell, 22 Ala. 645; Dew v. Bank, 9 Ala. 323. In this case, tile garnishee- Goode did- not answer and, without rendering the conditional judgment, and issuing the scire facias required 'by tile statute,^ the court entered a final judgment against him. This was -erfatal ernm Judgment reversed, and cause remandedt

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

Goode v. Holcombe, 37 Ala. 94 (Ala. 1860).

37 Ala. 94 (Goode v. Holcombe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Holland-Blow Stave Co. v. Whitman
97 So. 52 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1923)
Ex Parte National Lumber Mfg. Co.
41 So. 10 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1906)