Coulters v. Sand Man, Inc., 7218.
| Decision Date | 29 July 1935 |
| Docket Number | No. 7218.,7218. |
| Citation | 180 A. 341 |
| Parties | COULTERS v. SAND MAN, Inc., et al. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; Hugh B. Baker, Presiding Justice.
Action by Carrie B. Coulters against the Sand Man, Inc., and another, wherein the J. W. Bishop Company was garnishee. To review a decision charging it as garnishee, the J. W. Bishop Company excepts.
Exception sustained, and case remitted, with directions.
Frank H. Wildes, of Providence, for plaintiff.
Ralph M. Greenlaw, of Providence, for J. W. Bishop Co.
This case is before us on a bill of exceptions prosecuted by the J. W. Bishop Company to the decision of the superior court charging it as garnishee.
The material facts in this case up to a certain point are set forth in detail in the case of Coulters v. Sand Man, Inc. et al, 53 R. I. 151, 165 A. 220. We deem it necessary, however, to briefly state certain of those facts together with others not before the court at that time in order that the effect of that decision upon the issue before us may more clearly appear.
The plaintiff, on October 23, 1931, attached the J. W. Bishop Company as garnishee of the defendants, the Sand Man, Inc., and Leo Minutella, in an action in assumpsit. The garnishee, within the proper time, filed an affidavit setting forth, among other things, an assignment in writing by the defendant, the Sand Man, Inc., in favor of the Colonial Finance Corporation, and certain individuals as assignees. The case was duly answered by the defendants and, on April 25, 1932, it was discontinued as to the defendant Minutella and defaulted as to the Sand Man, Inc. On May 31, upon an ex parte motion by the plaintiff, decision was given for the plaintiff in the sum of $2,414.40 and costs, the garnishee was charged for that amount, and judgment was at once entered against the defendant, the Sand Man, Inc. Thereupon, the J. W. Bishop Company, on June 3, filed its motion "to vacate the judgment and the order charging the garnishee." On the same day, the Colonial Finance Corporation, without having become a party to the cause, filed a motion therein, as assignee under the aforesaid assignment, that the execution theretofore issued be recalled, that the order charging the garnishee be vacated and the garnishee discharged, and that an order be entered directing the garnishee to pay the fund in its hands to the Colonial Finance Corporation. On this same day the court ordered that the execution be stayed until further order. From this point on there was confusion due to the fact that two different proceedings were being followed at the same time.
On June 7, the J. W. Bishop Company filed an exception and notice of intention to prosecute a bill of exceptions to the decision of the court on May 31 charging it as garnishee. On July 14 the bill of exceptions, which is the only matter now before us, was filed in the superior court by the garnishee, together with a transcript; and on the next day both were allowed. On the latter day, after there had been a hearing on the two motions above described, they were both denied. To the decision denying the motion of the garnishee, no exception was filed. To the decision denying the motion of the Colonial Finance...
To continue reading
Request your trial