Mahony v. McLean
| Decision Date | 01 June 1881 |
| Parties | John Mahoney v. John A. McLean and another, Claimants, impleaded, etc |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment entered in the district court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., presiding, in garnishment proceedings, in favor of the garnishee and claimants.
Judgment affirmed.
Lamprey & James, for appellant.
Stanford Newel and William H. Lightner, for respondents.
Before this action was tried, plaintiff commenced proceedings in garnishment against the First National Bank of St. Paul. McLean and Macnider were admitted as claimants of the debt sought to be reached by the proceedings. Judgment in favor of the plaintiff, in the principal action, was entered October 22, 1879. The disclosure in garnishment was commenced before the entry of this judgment, and finally concluded December 8, 1879. After this, plaintiff made application to the court below for judgment, on the disclosure, against the garnishee defendant. This application was denied, on the merits, by order dated March 12, 1880. After this, plaintiff made an application for leave to file a supplemental complaint against the garnishee defendant and claimants, which was denied September 20, 1880. Plaintiff then made a motion that issues be framed. This was denied October 19, 1880. Judgment discharging the garnishee defendant was afterwards, on November 6, 1880, entered.
During the disclosure various exceptions were taken to rulings of the court, but we see nothing in any of them. The only question raised here, (except that relating to costs,) of sufficient importance to require special mention, is as to plaintiff's right to file a supplemental complaint at the time when he applied for leave to do so.
The statute (Gen. St. 1878, c. 66, § 175,) provides that a garnishee may be charged with respect to property he holds by a title void as to creditors of the defendant "but in such cases, and in all cases where the garnishee, upon full disclosure, denies any indebtedness to, or the possession or control of any property, money or effects of, the defendant, there shall be no further proceeding, except in the manner following: If the plaintiff, in such case, believes that such garnishee does not answer truly, in response to the questions put to him upon such examination, or that the conveyance under which he claims title to property is void as against the creditors of the defendant, he may, on notice to such garnishee and to the defendant, at any time before the garnishee has been discharged by the court or officer, of not less than six days, apply to the court in which the action is pending, or a judge thereof, for permission to file a supplemental complaint in the action, making the garnishee a party thereto, and setting forth the facts upon which he claims to charge such garnishee; and, if probable cause is shown by the plaintiff, permission shall be granted. * * *" Two things are apparent from this statute -- First, that a plaintiff cannot have leave to file a supplemental complaint merely...
To continue reading
Request your trial