Johnson v. Atlanta Furniture Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Johnson v. Atlanta Furniture Co.

169 S.E. 767, 47 Ga. App. 124, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 313

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 13, 1933

Docket22851

StatusPublished

This text of 169 S.E. 767 (Johnson v. Atlanta Furniture Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Johnson v. Atlanta Furniture Co., 169 S.E. 767, 47 Ga. App. 124, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 313 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. While summons of garnishment may issue from time to time before trial, without giving additional bond (Civil Code, § 5269), the plaintiff in a garnishment proceeding is not precluded from making, if he so desires, an additional affidavit and bond to obtain another summons of garnishment, where the answer of the garnishee to the first summons shows that he was indebted to the defendant in an amount less ' than that of the plaintiff’s claim.

2. Under the foregoing ruling and the facts of the instant ease, there was no substantial merit in the petition for certiorari (in which error was assigned upon the judgment of the appellate division of the municipal court of Atlanta,' affirming the judgment of the municipal court of Atlanta in overruling the petitioner’s motion for a new trial), and the judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. While summons of garnishment may issue from time to time before trial, without giving additional bond (Civil Code, § 5269), the plaintiff in a garnishment proceeding is not precluded from making, if he so desires, an additional affidavit and bond to obtain another summons of garnishment, where the answer of the garnishee to the first summons shows that he was indebted to the defendant in an amount less ' than that of the plaintiff’s claim.

2. Under the foregoing ruling and the facts of the instant ease, there was no substantial merit in the petition for certiorari (in which error was assigned upon the judgment of the appellate division of the municipal court of Atlanta,' affirming the judgment of the municipal court of Atlanta in overruling the petitioner’s motion for a new trial), and the judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 S.E. 767, 47 Ga. App. 124, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-atlanta-furniture-co-gactapp-1933.