Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

20 Tex. 101

Culbertson v. Ellison

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1857

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1857-07-01

Tried below before the Hon. Thomas H. DuVal. Suit by William Ellison against William D. Larrimore; attachment ; James Culbertson and two others, garnishees. Oct. 30th, 1856, answer of Culbertson, denying, &c. Same day trial of the cause; judgment against Larrimore, and in same entry judgment for same amount against Culbertson and another of the garnishees, reciting that they had been duly summoned and had failed to answer, but not reciting that they had been called.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1857-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently November 1921

3 state decisions

1018571860187018801890190019101920decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Wheeler, J.

¶1The presumption in favor of the judgment is, that the answer of the garnishee, though filed on the day of its rendition, was not, in fact, until after the judgment was rendered. It therefore was not in time to prevent the plaintiff from taking his judgment. But it is only by force of the statute that the plaintiff is entitled to his judgment against the garnishee. It is a rigorous proceeding, and a right depending upon strict law. The provision is that it shall be lawful for the Court “ after calling the garnishee” to render judgment against him (Hart. Dig. Art. 49.) The statute is plain and positive and must be complied with. There is no case against the garnishee upon the docket of the Court, and the object in requiring him to be called must be to give him notice, before judgment final is entered, in order that if, in fact, he is not the debtor of the defendant in attachment and has no effects of the latter in his hands, he may then avert the judgment by his answer. The record ought to show that the law was complied with. Especially when the garnishee answered immediately, and moved without delay to set aside the judgment because he had not been called as the law provides, we think the Court ought to have set aside the judgment and received the answer. We are of opinion, therefore, that the judgment be reversed, as to this garnishee, and the cause remanded. The judgment cannot be revised and will not be affected as to the defendant in attachment and the other garnishee, not before the Court upon this appeal.

¶2Reversed and remanded.

/20/tex/101 · .json · Public domain