Manry v. Shepperd
57 Ga. 68
Opinion
We think there was no error in overruling the affidavit of illegality on any of the grounds except the third, which is disposed of in the eighth head-note. That ground was good, in substance; and the plaintiff virtually yielded the question by amending the fi. fa. The Code is express, that a levy pending when such an amendment is made, falls. Why does it fall ? Not because it becomes illegal by the amendment, but because it was illegal before, and remains so : Code, section 3495.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Manry v. Shepperd, 57 Ga. 68 (Ga. 1876).
57 Ga. 68 (Manry v. Shepperd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Butler v. Mobley
152 S.E. 229 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1930)
Bank of LaFayette v. Wardlaw
93 S.E. 236 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Banks v. Giles
92 S.E. 651 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Georgia Northern Railway Co. v. Cone
88 S.E. 701 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)
Georgia Northern Railway Co. v. Home Mercantile Co.
88 S.E. 413 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)
Williams v. Kennedy
67 S.E. 821 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1910)
Jordan v. Farmers & Merchants Bank
62 S.E. 1024 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
Sims v. Hatcher & Wilkerson
3 S.E. 92 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1887)
Rogers v. Felker
1 Ga. L. Rep. 383 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1886)
Hall v. Woolley
59 Ga. 755 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1877)