Case ID: ga-app_24/html/0558-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Broyles, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

9715.
    Groves, adm’x, v. Bibb Sewer Pipe Company.
    1. On the traverse of an answer of “not indebted,” filed in response to a summons of garnishment, the issue is, whether the garnishee had at the time of service, or between that time and the date of his answer, assets of the defendant in his hands.
    
      (a) Under the answer of the Supreme Court to the certified question in this case (149 Ga. 542, 101 S. E. 190), the statement in the headnote in Mosely v. McGough, 69 Ga. 748, that “on the traverse of an answer of not indebted, filed in response to a summons of garnishment, the issue is, whether the garnishee had at the time of service, or has since had, assets of the defendant in his hands,” is not correct, and it will not be followed as a ruling of that court.
    2. There is no statute of force in this State making the process of garnishment available to a creditor who seeks to subject realty of his debtor in the possession of a third person to the payment of the creditor’s debt.
    (а) The word “property” in section 5272 of the Civil Code of 1910 does not include land.
    (б) Nor do the words “legacy or distributive share,” in section 5304 of the Civil Code include land, or any interest therein.
    3. Applying the principles of law stated above to the facts of the instant case, the finding in favor of the traverse and against the answer of the garnishee was contrary to law and the evidence, and the court erred in overruling the general grounds of the motion for a new trial.
    Decided December 10, 1919.
    Garnishment; from city court of Macon—Judge Guerry. March 21, 1918.
    
      8. B. Hunter, II. F. Strohecher, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Hardeman, Jones, Parle & Johnston, Harry 8. 8trozier, contra.
   Broyles, C. J.

Certain questions involved in this case were certified by this court to the Supreme Court, and the latter court, in answer thereto, ruled substantially as set forth in the. 1st and 2d headnotes, supra. For an elaboration of these notes see the full opinion of the Supreme Court in Groves v. Bibb Sewer Pipe Co., 149 Ga. 542 (101 S. E. 190).

Judgment reversed.

Lulce and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.