Case Name: John H. Pleasants & Sons vs. John Kemp, Jr.; J. H. Oglesby, C. L. Chase, I. W. Arthur & Co., Garnishees; I. W. Homan, Intervenor
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1876-02
Citations: 28 La. Ann. 124
Docket Number: No. 5208
Parties: John H. Pleasants & Sons vs. John Kemp, Jr.; J. H. Oglesby, C. L. Chase, I. W. Arthur & Co., Garnishees; I. W. Homan, Intervenor.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 28
Pages: 124–125

Head Matter:
No. 5208.
John H. Pleasants & Sons vs. John Kemp, Jr.; J. H. Oglesby, C. L. Chase, I. W. Arthur & Co., Garnishees; I. W. Homan, Intervenor.
It sooms eloar that thoro was no effective soizuro in this easo. To make a valid soiz-uro o£ a negotiable noto under tho circumstances of this ease, it was essential that tho sheriff should have taken actual corporeal possession of it.
APPEAL from the Fifth District Court, parish of Orleans. Beaumont, J.
W. II. Hunt and James Lingan, for plaintiffs and appellees.
Randolph, Singleton & Browne, for garnishees, appellant.
Breaux, Fen-ner & Hall, for intorvonor, appellant.

Opinion:
Howell, J.
The plaintiffs, having judgment against the defendant, Kemp, issued garnishment process against T. W. Arthur & Co. and J. H. Oglesby and C. L. Chase as tho assignees of Arthur & Co. Tho answers of tho garnishees show that the firm of Arthur & Co. owed defendant, Kemp, $1112 79 for services as clerk, and in settlement gave him their two notes in negotiable iorm lor the amount, and that defendant with tho other creditors accepted the assignment of the assets of the firm before service of this proceeding, and three of the creditors, including Oglesby and Chase, were chosen to settle up the affairs as a committee or agents of the creditors, but they did not know who held the notes, the holder, however, being entitled to the payment of the same.
Tho plaintiffs moved for judgment against the garnishees on their answers, and, the rule being made absolute, the garnishees appealed.
It seems clear that there was no effective seizure in this case. To make a valid seizure of a negotiable note under the circumstances of this case, it was essential that the sheriff take actual corporeal possession of it. See 14 L. 449; 6 An. 531, 581; 19 An. 58.
Under this view of the case it is unnecessary to consider any other questions presented.
• It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from be reversed, and that there be judgment in favor of tho defendants in the rule (garnishees) with costs. Plaintiffs to pay costs of appeal.