Strickland v. Maddox

Supreme Court of Georgia

Strickland v. Maddox

9 Ga. 196

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 15, 1850

DocketNo. 40

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 9 Ga. 196 (Strickland v. Maddox) 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

Strickland v. Maddox, 9 Ga. 196 (Ga. 1850).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

Lumpkin, J.

delivering the opinion.

[1.] Henry Strickland, having an execution against Henry II. Waters and Ira R. Foster, caused it to be levied on a lot of land which was claimed by Posey Maddox. At August Term, 1846, of the Superior Court of Cherokee County, the Jury found the property in dispute subject to thefi.fia. with 10 per cent, damages, believing that the claim was interposed for delay. The claimant, Maddox, being dissatisfied with the verdict, entered an appeal in terms of the law. At August Term, 1847, of said Court, the claim was withdrawn. Application was recently made to James Jordan, the Clerk of the Court where the cause was pending, to issue an execution upon the first judgment, which he refused to do. An order was then applied for, to compel a compliance with this request, which the Judge of the Superior Court refused to grant; and it is to reverse this judgment that this writ of error is prosecuted.

The appeal being still in Court, undisposed of, we hold that the Court was right in denying the motion. Attaway vs. Dyer and others, 8 Geo. Rep. 184.

Judgment affirmed.

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

By the Court.

Lumpkin, J.

delivering the opinion.

[1.] Henry Strickland, having an execution against Henry II. Waters and Ira R. Foster, caused it to be levied on a lot of land which was claimed by Posey Maddox. At August Term, 1846, of the Superior Court of Cherokee County, the Jury found the property in dispute subject to thefi.fia. with 10 per cent, damages, believing that the claim was interposed for delay. The claimant, Maddox, being dissatisfied with the verdict, entered an appeal in terms of the law. At August Term, 1847, of said Court, the claim was withdrawn. Application was recently made to James Jordan, the Clerk of the Court where the cause was pending, to issue an execution upon the first judgment, which he refused to do. An order was then applied for, to compel a compliance with this request, which the Judge of the Superior Court refused to grant; and it is to reverse this judgment that this writ of error is prosecuted.

The appeal being still in Court, undisposed of, we hold that the Court was right in denying the motion. Attaway vs. Dyer and others, 8 Geo. Rep. 184.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Ga. 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strickland-v-maddox-ga-1850.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack