First Nat. Bank v. Gaines, 4 Div. 256

• Decision Date: 02 June 1936
• Docket Number: 4 Div. 256
• Parties: FIRST NAT. BANK OF ASHFORD v. GAINES.
• Court: Alabama Court of Appeals

168 So. 702

27 Ala.App. 191

FIRST NAT. BANK OF ASHFORD v. GAINES.

4 Div. 256

Court of Appeals of Alabama

June 2, 1936

Appeal from Circuit Court, Houston County; D.C. Halstead, Judge.

Claim suit between the First National Bank of Ashford, plaintiff in garnishment, and F.M. Gaines, claimant. From a judgment for claimant, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

H.R. McClintock, of Dothan, for appellant.

F.M Gaines, of Dothan, pro se.

SAMFORD Judge.

On the 23d day of February, 1935, the plaintiff obtained a judgment against J.L. Sinquefield, in the circuit court of Houston county, in the sum of $1,000 and costs of court, and on the 27th day of February, 1935, obtained a garnishment directed to the Farmers & Merchants Bank, Ashford, Ala., to which writ of garnishment the garnishee, Farmers & Merchants Bank, made answer that it was indebted to the said J.L. Sinquefield defendant in execution, in the sum of $110 and that it was not indebted to him otherwise.

On April 2, 1935, the garnishee filed a supplemental answer in which it set forth the following facts: "The said J.L Sinquefield, prior to the service of the garnishment writ in said cause, came to the Farmers & Merchants Bank, and advised the Cashier thereof that he had given two checks upon said Bank, aggregating a certain sum, and inquired if he had a sufficient amount of money on deposit to pay same. The Cashier of said Bank advised him that his balance on deposit was insufficient to pay the amount covered by said checks. After the said J.L. Sinquefield was so advised, he deposited with the Farmers & Merchants Bank the necessary sum of money and requested that the two checks be paid upon presentation."

In said supplemental answer, the garnishee gave notice that claimant, F.M. Gaines, claims said funds. On these answers and the suggestion of Gaines, as claimant, issue was made up by the court, sitting without a jury, and, the evidence being considered by the court, judgment was rendered in favor of claimant. On the introduction of testimony, there were several objections and exceptions relating to a check for $110 drawn by Sinquefield on the First National Bank of Ashford, but, as we read this record, the rulings of the court on the admission of this testimony are not necessary here to be considered, in view of the fact that the undisputed evidence in the case discloses the transaction between the parties in such manner as to bring the entire question before this court.

It appears from the record that the First National Bank obtained the judgment against Sinquefield and upon said judgment procured a writ of garnishment against the Farmers &amp Merchants Bank,...