Avery & Co. v. Pope

Decided October 31, 1913

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1913-10-31

Attachment; from city court of Leesburg — Judge Long. January 23, 1913. The defendant moved to dismiss the attachment, basing the motion on the ground that the attachment affidavit did not allege that the debt was due, and upon the further ground that it did not contain an accurate and specific description” of the property.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1934

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1913-10-31

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Russell, J.

¶11. The court erred in dismissing the attachment.

¶2(а) In an affidavit made to obtain an attachment for purchase-money the statement that the defendant “is indebted” is equivalent to the word “due,” employed in the statute (Civil Code, § 5085).

¶3(б) The property sought to be attached was sufficiently described to enable the levying officer to identify it for the purpose of seizure. Furthermore, the defendant was precluded by the admissions of his answer from denying that the property was subject to the attachment; and the demurrer should have been filed at the appearance term, and came too late.

¶4(c) In the mode of procedure to be followed, attachments for purchase-money do not differ from attachments based upon other grounds enumerated in section 5055 of the Civil Code. Judgment reversed.

J. B. Hoyl, for plaintiffs.R. R. Forrest, Hollis Fort, for defendant.