Henegar v. Spangler

29 Ga. 217
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided August 15, 1859·Published·Cited by 14 cases

Opinion

— Lumpkin J.

By the Court.

delivering the opinion.

The common law rule is recognized by the presiding Judge, that ordinarily the law exempts a party from arrest while going to, attending on, and returning from Court. But lie considered that the circumstances of this case were peculiar, and justified a departure from the usual practice. These litigants were citizens of Tennessee 5 they met in Georgia -, each sued out bail process against the other. Henegar succeeded in having Spangler arrested in vacation, and the Judge thought it but just that Spangler might have Henegar ■arrested during the Term, where he was in attendance as a suitor.

However right the thing was ip itself, and I agree with Judge Crook that it was so, still, inasmuch the law, as it stands, makes no such distinction, the exception will have to [219]*219be grafted upon the common law principle, by th.e Legislature and not by the Courts.

We are compelled, therefore, reluctantly to reverse the judgment.

Judgment reversed.

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

Henegar v. Spangler, 29 Ga. 217 (Ga. 1859).

29 Ga. 217 (Henegar v. Spangler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ausbon v. Ausbon
206 S.E.2d 546 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Turner v. McGee
125 S.E.2d 36 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1962)
Lomax v. Lomax
168 S.E. 863 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1933)
State ex rel. Gunn v. Superior Court
189 P. 1016 (Washington Supreme Court, 1920)
Vaughn v. Boyd
82 S.E. 576 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1914)
Hale v. Wharton
73 F. 739 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri, 1896)
Fisk v. Westover
55 N.W. 961 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1893)
Christian v. Williams
20 S.W. 96 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1892)
Wilson v. Donaldson
3 L.R.A. 266 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1889)
Palmer v. Rowan
21 Neb. 452 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1887)
Ex parte Schulenburg
25 F. 211 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan, 1885)
Mitchell v. Huron Circuit Judge
53 Mich. 541 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1884)
Larned v. Griffin
12 F. 590 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts, 1882)