Kingery v. Citizens Bank

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Kingery v. Citizens Bank

86 S.E. 281, 17 Ga. App. 68, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 261

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 10, 1915

Docket6172

StatusPublished

This text of 86 S.E. 281 (Kingery v. Citizens Bank) 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

Kingery v. Citizens Bank, 86 S.E. 281, 17 Ga. App. 68, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 261 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Wade, J.

1. The evidence of the sheriff disclosed that the fund sought to be distributed by rule had never in fact been so distributed prior to the time he was served with notice of the claim of the plaintiff, accompanied by the liens upon which the notice was based, and no entry to that effect had ever been made upon the intervenor’s fi. fa. by the sheriff or by any one acting under his authority. The sheriff testified: “I have never authorized anybody to make an entry allowing $604.10 on the fl. fa. of L. H. Kingery [intervenor]. I have never authorized .anybody to make any writing showing that this money has been applied.” “I have not deposited the $604.10 yet” — the amount in dispute which the intervenor claimed had already been applied to his execution before the notice of the plaintiff, claiming the funds, with alias fi. fas. attached thereto, had been served upon the sheriff. The sheriff testified further: “This money has never been actually paid in and no distribution been actually made. In that sense I have never distributed the $604.10.”

2. No distribution having ever been finally made of the fund in hand before the sheriff was served with sufficient legal notice of the claim of the plaintiff against the fund, but it further appearing that the sheriff held an obligation from the intervenor, binding the intervenor [69]*69to “pay in the $604.10 if it was held by the court to be subject to these fi. fas. of the Citizens Bank of Pulaski,” it is clear no final and irrevocable application of the fund by the sheriff to the junior fi. fa. in favor of the intervenor was made before the service upon him of the notice in behalf of the plaintiff or complainant in the court below, accompanied by liens which were superior to the lien of the intervenor.

Decided September 10, 1915.

Money-rule; from city court of Statesboro — Judge Strange. November 17, 1914.

Brannen & Booth, Deal & Benfroe, for plaintiffs in error. Renter Proctor, F. B. Hunter, contra. • -

3. The court did not err, on the facts in evidence, in finding that the fi. fas. in favor of the Citizens Bank of Pulaski constituted a superior lien against the fund, and in thereafter overruling the motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

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

Wade, J.

1. The evidence of the sheriff disclosed that the fund sought to be distributed by rule had never in fact been so distributed prior to the time he was served with notice of the claim of the plaintiff, accompanied by the liens upon which the notice was based, and no entry to that effect had ever been made upon the intervenor’s fi. fa. by the sheriff or by any one acting under his authority. The sheriff testified: “I have never authorized anybody to make an entry allowing $604.10 on the fl. fa. of L. H. Kingery [intervenor]. I have never authorized .anybody to make any writing showing that this money has been applied.” “I have not deposited the $604.10 yet” — the amount in dispute which the intervenor claimed had already been applied to his execution before the notice of the plaintiff, claiming the funds, with alias fi. fas. attached thereto, had been served upon the sheriff. The sheriff testified further: “This money has never been actually paid in and no distribution been actually made. In that sense I have never distributed the $604.10.”

2. No distribution having ever been finally made of the fund in hand before the sheriff was served with sufficient legal notice of the claim of the plaintiff against the fund, but it further appearing that the sheriff held an obligation from the intervenor, binding the intervenor [69]*69to “pay in the $604.10 if it was held by the court to be subject to these fi. fas. of the Citizens Bank of Pulaski,” it is clear no final and irrevocable application of the fund by the sheriff to the junior fi. fa. in favor of the intervenor was made before the service upon him of the notice in behalf of the plaintiff or complainant in the court below, accompanied by liens which were superior to the lien of the intervenor.

Decided September 10, 1915.

Money-rule; from city court of Statesboro — Judge Strange. November 17, 1914.

Brannen & Booth, Deal & Benfroe, for plaintiffs in error. Renter Proctor, F. B. Hunter, contra. • -

3. The court did not err, on the facts in evidence, in finding that the fi. fas. in favor of the Citizens Bank of Pulaski constituted a superior lien against the fund, and in thereafter overruling the motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 S.E. 281, 17 Ga. App. 68, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kingery-v-citizens-bank-gactapp-1915.