Bradley v. Fraser
| Decision Date | 24 June 1880 |
| Citation | 6 N.W. 293,54 Iowa 289 |
| Parties | BRADLEY v. FRASER, GARNISHEE. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Clayton circuit court.
The plaintiff commenced a suit in attachment against Jacob Bach before a justice of the peace, in Clayton county, and Bach was personally served with notice in said county. On the return day judgment by default was rendered against Bach for $50.80 and costs. The attachment was served by the garnishment of D. D. Fraser, on whose answer judgment was rendered against him, as garnishee, for $50.80 and costs, and costs of garnishment. The garnishee appealed to the circuit court. The appeal was tried to the court, and the facts were found as follows: “June 1, 1878, Bach was a resident of Buchanan county, Iowa, when he went to McGregor, Clayton county, Iowa, with his family, to build a school-house under a contract. He finished the job December 18, 1878, when he returned with his family to Buchanan county, where he has ever since resided. Bach brought his family with him, to enable him to board the hands at work on said job, and from the first of June until sometime in November Bach kept house and boarded said hands in McGregor, and afterwards, up to the day this suit was commenced, he and his family and hands boarded at a hotel in McGregor. Bach came from Buchanan county to do said job, intending to return as soon as the job should be finished, and during the time he was in McGregor he held this intention, and regarded Buchanan county as his residence and home, and his stay in McGregor as temporary.
“The garnishee admits that he is indebted to Bach in a sum exceeding the amount of the judgment, but claims that the judgment against him is void because he was an actual resident of Buchanan county at the time the suit was commenced.
These are all the facts, on which this court renders judgment against the garnishee for the amount of the judgment against Bach.”
The defendant appeals. The court, in vacation, made and caused to be filed an additional finding of facts, but this we cannot consider.
The judge certifies that the cause involves a question of law, on which it is desired that the opinion of the supreme court be had, to-wit: “Under the facts found by the court, was the defendant, Boch, an actual resident of Buchanan county at the commencement of this suit, within the meaning of section 3507 of the Code?”L. O. Hatch, for appellant.
Robert Quigley, for appellee.
Section 3507 of the Code provides: “The...
To continue reading
Request your trial