Singer Sewing Machine Co. v. Barnett
This text of 76 Ga. 377 (Singer Sewing Machine Co. v. Barnett) 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
The question here is, whether a constable can protect himself, under a rule, for not making the money due on a fi.fa. placed in his hands, on the ground that thefi.fa. did not follow the judgment upon which it was issued.
This court held in Gladden, sheriff, vs. J. L. & R. H. Cobb, decided at September term, 1884 (73 Ga., 235), that a sheriff would not be protected, upon a rule against him, on the ground that the execution issued on an irregular proceeding, for not collecting the amount due on the execution. The execution in the present case is not void, but only voidable, and could have been amended. The officer is not a judicial, but a ministerial officer ; ho must execute all process placed in his hands which is regular and proper on its face and which is issued by a person having authority to do so. 19 Ga., 139, 268.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
76 Ga. 377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/singer-sewing-machine-co-v-barnett-ga-1886.