Oxford Knitting Mills v. Sutton
This text of 56 S.E. 298 (Oxford Knitting Mills v. Sutton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Under the provisions of the Civil Code, § 5681, a prochein ami, who has prosecuted a personal action in the name and behalf of a minor, will not be allowed to receive the proceeds of the suit until he has executed the bond therein provided for. This, however, does not prevent a lawfully authorized levying officer from proceeding with the collection'of the execution issued upon such judgment. Payment to the lawfully authorized officer will he protection for the defendant, and it is the officer who will be interested in seeing that the prochein ami gives the bond. The bond is never required until the time comes for the prochein ami “to receive the proceeds,” and that condition does not exist while the enforcement of the execution continues to remain in the coercive state. It follows that it is not an available ground of illegality to the enforcement of snch execution that the prochein ami has not given the bond before mentioned.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
56 S.E. 298, 127 Ga. 162, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oxford-knitting-mills-v-sutton-ga-1906.