Walker v. Zorn
56 Ga. 35
Opinion
The count for mesne profits, in an action of ejectment, is a claim for money, and when such an action is pending we see no reason for denying the plaintiff the remedy of garnishment. The Code seems broad enough to embrace all money demands, whether resting on tort or on contract: Code, sections 3532, 3533, 3278.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Walker v. Zorn, 56 Ga. 35 (Ga. 1876).
56 Ga. 35 (Walker v. Zorn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Brydie v. Pritchard
100 S.E.2d 435 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1957)
Curtis v. Bailey
179 S.E. 633 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Gamble v. Central Railroad & Banking Co.
7 S.E. 315 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1888)