Reichert v. Voss

• Decision Date: 25 January 1887
• Citation: 2 S.E. 558,78 Ga. 54
• Parties: REICHERT v. VOSS.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

2 S.E. 558

78 Ga. 54

REICHERT v. VOSS.

Supreme Court of Georgia

January 25, 1887

Error from city court of Macon.

Lofton & Moore, for plaintiff in error.

A Proudfit and C. L. Bartlett, contra.

BLECKLEY C.J. ^[1]

A judicial notary public for the district of A. not only held his court apart from his colleague, the regular justice of the peace of the district, but located it beyond the border at a point within the adjoining district of B. Here, in a building called the "Goodall Building," he rendered four judgments against Reichert, two of them for less and two for more than $100 principal each. Moreover, he held his court and rendered these judgments on the first Tuesday in the month, when the court-day of his colleague was, and had been for many years, the third Saturday in the month. In which of the districts, or whether in either, Reichert resided, does not appear from the record. His place of business was in B. on the same street, and within two or three doors of the Goodall building. In each case the summons specified that building as the place for him to appear, and called for his appearance on a day of the month corresponding to the first Tuesday. The suits were all founded on promissory notes, and copies of the notes were attached. On each summons he signed a written entry of "Due and legal service acknowledged, copy waived, and jurisdiction waived." Besides this, he told the notary he might enter up judgment, and that he had no plea to offer and, after the judgments were rendered, he said to the notary repeatedly that he expected to pay without a sale. Fi fas. upon the judgments were issued by the notary, and by the constable of A. were levied upon certain furniture then being at the place of business of the debtor, in the district of B. The constable rented space in the debtor's store-room, where the furniture was seized, in which to store it until the day of sale; and on that day, when the constable came for it, the debtor assisted in clearing a passage for it through the room to the place of exit on its way to be sold. He made no objection to this removal, or to the sale, though he knew a sale was intended. The sale was made by the constable, publicly, on the first Tuesday in February, before the Goodall building in the district of B., and the debtor was either immediately present, or in his store only two or three doors away, while the sale was in progress. He himself testifies that he did not go out of his store, but the notary testifies to seeing him at the sale, off and on. So far as appears, no one heard a whisper of objection from him, and in his testimony he does not intimate that he expressed, or even that he entertained, any objection whatever. He had not made known to the notary that he intended to pay off the judgments, but had frequently told the constable that such was his...