Paton & Co. v. Chambliss & Co.

Supreme Court of Georgia

Paton & Co. v. Chambliss & Co.

40 S.E. 760, 114 Ga. 626, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 741

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 5, 1902

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 40 S.E. 760 (Paton & Co. v. Chambliss & Co.) 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.

Bluebook

Paton & Co. v. Chambliss & Co., 40 S.E. 760, 114 Ga. 626, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 741 (Ga. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Little, J.

1. Where a creditor sued out a garnishment proceeding based upon a pending action, and thereafter obtained judgment against the defendant, and, while this judgment was before the Supreme Court for review, caused an additional summons of garnishment to be issued on the original affidavit and bond: Meld, that, after the affirmance of the judgment of the trial court by the Supreme Court, it was not erroneous to dismiss the garnishment proceeding in so far as it related to the last summons issued. Under the facts recited, the same was not authorized by that part of section 4709 of the Civil Code which declares that11 Summons of garnishment may issue under the provisions of this section, from time to time, before trial, without giving any additional bond.” See also Ahrens v. Patton, 94 Ga. 247.

2. In such a case, though the truth of the garnishee’s answer denying indebtedness was not decided by a trial of the traverse thereof, it was nevertheless proper to tax as costs in the case the expenses incurred by the garnishee in making his answer, including the fee of the attorney for preparing the same. Civil Code, §4728 ; Curry v. Bank, 53 Ga. 28 ; Sulter v. Brooks, 74 Ga. 401. Darnall v. Wood, 82 Ga. 556 ; Moore v. Read, 84 Ga. 658.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Little, J.

1. Where a creditor sued out a garnishment proceeding based upon a pending action, and thereafter obtained judgment against the defendant, and, while this judgment was before the Supreme Court for review, caused an additional summons of garnishment to be issued on the original affidavit and bond: Meld, that, after the affirmance of the judgment of the trial court by the Supreme Court, it was not erroneous to dismiss the garnishment proceeding in so far as it related to the last summons issued. Under the facts recited, the same was not authorized by that part of section 4709 of the Civil Code which declares that11 Summons of garnishment may issue under the provisions of this section, from time to time, before trial, without giving any additional bond.” See also Ahrens v. Patton, 94 Ga. 247.

2. In such a case, though the truth of the garnishee’s answer denying indebtedness was not decided by a trial of the traverse thereof, it was nevertheless proper to tax as costs in the case the expenses incurred by the garnishee in making his answer, including the fee of the attorney for preparing the same. Civil Code, §4728 ; Curry v. Bank, 53 Ga. 28 ; Sulter v. Brooks, 74 Ga. 401. Darnall v. Wood, 82 Ga. 556 ; Moore v. Read, 84 Ga. 658.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 S.E. 760, 114 Ga. 626, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paton-co-v-chambliss-co-ga-1902.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack