Donaldson v. Security Trust & Safety-Vault Co. of Lexington

• Decision Date: 24 April 1900
• Citation: 56 S.W. 424
• Parties: DONALDSON v. SECURITY TRUST & SAFETY-VAULT CO. OF LEXINGTON. [1]
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

56 S.W. 424

DONALDSON v. SECURITY TRUST & SAFETY-VAULT CO. OF LEXINGTON. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

April 24, 1900

Appeal from circuit court, Fayette county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by A. H. Donaldson against M. F. Hopkins and the Security Trust & Safety-Vault Company of Lexington, Ky. to recover a debt. Judgment for defendant the Security Trust &amp Safety-Vault Company of Lexington, Ky. and plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Hobbs &amp Scott, for appellant.

Falconer & Falconer, for appellee.

HOBSON J.

Appellant A. H. Donaldson, brought this suit against M. F. Hopkins to recover a debt of $146.50. It was alleged that the defendant was a nonresident of the state, and an attachment was obtained, which was served on the appellee, the Security Trust & Safety-Vault Company of Lexington, Ky. and a warning order was made against the defendant. Appellee appeared and filed answer as garnishee, stating that it was not indebted to the defendant M. F. Hopkins in any sum whatever; that it held no money or rents belonging to her, and had no property of any kind of hers in its hands, subject to attachment, to which the defendant M. F. Hopkins was entitled. Appellant thereupon, under section 227 of the Civil Code of Practice filed an amended petition, making appellee a defendant to the action, and alleging that at the time the attachment was served upon it in the action, as garnishee, it then held for the defendant F. N. Hopkins large sums of money and property, which it manages as trustee for her, and that it was then indebted to her, and held money and other property belonging to her, far in excess of plaintiff's debt, interest, and costs. On this amended petition a summons was issued, which was served on appellee. It then appeared in the action as a defendant, and filed its demurrer to the amended petition, which was sustained by the court; and, appellant failing to plead further, the amended petition was dismissed.

Appellee urges the following grounds in support of the judgment: (1) That the petition in a case of this character against a garnishee who has answered must state facts sufficient to make out a cause of action against the garnishee, and that the amended petition is insufficient, in not showing the amount held by it as trustee; (2) that the affidavit for the warning order was defective, and the warning order therefore, void; (3) that the amended petition alleges an indebtedness to F. N. Hopkins, while the original petition and the attachment were against M. F. Hopkins; (4) that the amended petition fails to allege that an attachment had issued, or had been served on appellee, or to show when this was done. None of these objections can be maintained. ...