Richardson v. Whitfield

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Richardson v. Whitfield

12 S.C.L. 403

DecidedMay 15, 1821

StatusPublished

This text of 12 S.C.L. 403 (Richardson v. Whitfield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Richardson v. Whitfield, 12 S.C.L. 403 (S.C. 1821).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Huger

delivered the opinion of the court.

At the trial I was unacquainted with a decision of the Constitutional Court, made at Columbia some years since, and which my Senior Brothers tell me fixed the practice in such cases. The decision has not been reported, neither is the title recollected, but the garnishee was a Mr. Silli-man. In the case alluded to, it was determined, that no proceedings were necessary to be had against the garnishee who makes no return to the attachment until judgment was had against the absent debtor. And then upon, motion, even without notice, judgment is entered up against the garnishee. As the court decided in the case of Wm. Alston, garnishee of Pinckney, not reported as I know of, that the act of the legislature making a copy writ, left at the residence of the defendant, equivalent to personal service, did not include writs of attachment, I apprehend that no inconvenience will result from dispensing with notice.

A new trial is ordered.

Justices Bay-, Nott, Gantt and Johnson, concurred.

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

Mr. Justice Huger

delivered the opinion of the court.

At the trial I was unacquainted with a decision of the Constitutional Court, made at Columbia some years since, and which my Senior Brothers tell me fixed the practice in such cases. The decision has not been reported, neither is the title recollected, but the garnishee was a Mr. Silli-man. In the case alluded to, it was determined, that no proceedings were necessary to be had against the garnishee who makes no return to the attachment until judgment was had against the absent debtor. And then upon, motion, even without notice, judgment is entered up against the garnishee. As the court decided in the case of Wm. Alston, garnishee of Pinckney, not reported as I know of, that the act of the legislature making a copy writ, left at the residence of the defendant, equivalent to personal service, did not include writs of attachment, I apprehend that no inconvenience will result from dispensing with notice.

A new trial is ordered.

Justices Bay-, Nott, Gantt and Johnson, concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 S.C.L. 403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-whitfield-sc-1821.