Whalen v. Harrison

Montana Supreme Court

Whalen v. Harrison

27 P. 384, 11 Mont. 63, 1891 Mont. LEXIS 51

DecidedJuly 20, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 27 P. 384 (Whalen v. Harrison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Whalen v. Harrison, 27 P. 384, 11 Mont. 63, 1891 Mont. LEXIS 51 (Mo. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

De Witt, J.

The motion to discharge the garnishment was made in the District Court solely upon the ground that the garnishee, as a public corporation, was exempt from garnishment. No other ground was set forth in the written motion which is preserved in this record. That the motion on that ground should have been denied is settled. (Waterbury v. Commrs. of Deer Lodge County, 10 Mont. 515; 24 Am. St. Rep. 67.) Since the decision of the Waterbw'y Case, respondent filed his brief, in which he urges in this court that which he did not present below, viz., that it did not appear that any fixed debt was due from the garnishee to the defendant. Whether there was or not is not apparent from this record, and is a matter to be ascertained in the lower court in the manner provided by the law as to garnishment. (Code Civ. Proc. § 190.)

The order discharging the garnishment is reversed, and the case is remanded, with directions to the District Court to proceed in accordance with the views herein expressed.

Reversed.

Blake, C. J., and Harwood, J., concur.

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

De Witt, J.

The motion to discharge the garnishment was made in the District Court solely upon the ground that the garnishee, as a public corporation, was exempt from garnishment. No other ground was set forth in the written motion which is preserved in this record. That the motion on that ground should have been denied is settled. (Waterbury v. Commrs. of Deer Lodge County, 10 Mont. 515; 24 Am. St. Rep. 67.) Since the decision of the Waterbw'y Case, respondent filed his brief, in which he urges in this court that which he did not present below, viz., that it did not appear that any fixed debt was due from the garnishee to the defendant. Whether there was or not is not apparent from this record, and is a matter to be ascertained in the lower court in the manner provided by the law as to garnishment. (Code Civ. Proc. § 190.)

The order discharging the garnishment is reversed, and the case is remanded, with directions to the District Court to proceed in accordance with the views herein expressed.

Reversed.

Blake, C. J., and Harwood, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 P. 384, 11 Mont. 63, 1891 Mont. LEXIS 51, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whalen-v-harrison-mont-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack