Moore v. Brewer
| Decision Date | 06 August 1894 |
| Citation | 94 Ga. 260,21 S.E. 460 |
| Parties | MOORE . v. BREWER et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Attachment—Amendment of Writ — Dismissal —Striking out Evidence—Verdict.
1. Although, upon the trial of a traverse of the ground of an attachment, the burden of proof be on the plaintiff, yet, where he successfully carried the burden, a charge of the court that the burden was upon the defendant was harmless.
2. An attachment being amendable, the affidavit and bond may be looked to in aid of the writ itself, when it is wanting in certainty as to the person against whom it was intended the writ should issue; and where, with such aid the identity of the person can be ascertained beyond all doubt, the attachment should not be dismissed because it merely describes the debtor as having in his possession the property to be seized, and does not designate him as a debtor or as the defendant in* the proceeding.
3. The sheriff's return of levy does not negative the possession of the defendant in attachment by stating that the property was seized at a specified railroad depot.
4. A motion to rule out evidence, without stating upon what specific ground the motion was rested or what objection was made to the evidence, is not for review. A statement that the evidence was "illegal, " without disclosing why it was illegal, is too general.
5. The evidence warranted the verdict, both as to the ground of the attachment and as to the main case.
6. Where the attachment suit and the traverse to the ground of attachment were tried together, and the verdict found for the plaintiff a specified sum for principal and another for interest, and against the traverse, the signature of the foreman following both findings, but separated from the latter about one inch in space, and the two findings themselves being separated by a like space, the signature was sufficient to authenticate the whole verdict, nothing appearing which indicates or suggests that it was not meant to apply to the whole.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from city court of Carroll; W. P. Brown, Judge.
Action in attachment by H. Brewer & Co. against J. P. Moore. Plaintiffs had judgment and defendant brings error. Affirmed.
The following is the official report:
Attachment was issued in favor of H. Brewer & Co. against J. P. Moore for the purchase money of a brick machine sold by plaintiffs to defendant. The affidavit for attachment alleges that "said brick machine is at this present time in the possession of said J. P. Moore, " and that "affiant makes this affidavit that an attachment may issue against said No. 8 mold brick machine, made by said H. Brewer & Co., for said purchase money." The attachment issued upon this affidavit commands the levying officers "to attach and seize, for the purpose of making $616 and interest, purchase money, and all costs, one No. 8 brick mold machine manufactured by H. Brewer & Co., of Tecumseh, Michigan, at present in the possession of J. P. Moore, " etc. The levy was made upon the property so described "at the old C, R. & C. depot, as the property of the defendant J. P. Moore." The defendant filed "a traverse of the ground of said attachment, " and for cause of traverse alleged "that it was not true that he was in possession of said machine at the time of suing out said attachment, nor ever has been." At the trial, defendant's counsel (his client being absent) moved to dismiss the attachment, on the grounds (1) that it was against the machine, and not against the defendant; (2) that it appeared by the sheriff's...
To continue reading
Request your trial