Court Opinion

ID: 9533244
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:29:48.586349+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:58.768686
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
*579William K. Shepherd, Portland, for the petition.
No appearance contra.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Langtry and Fort, Judges.
LANGTRY, J.
In a petition for rehearing the plaintiff requests us to change our decision by requiring garnishee to answer the interrogatories and be examined as contemplated by the garnishment statutes. ORS 29.110 et seq. In our opinion we said that plaintiff was satisfied with the amount of money owing which garnishee had set out in its return to the garnishment. That is the impression we had received in oral argument from plaintiff’s attorney, but this point was overshadowed by the principal legal issue involved.
Plaintiff is entitled to question the accuracy of the return, and our mandate is modified so that the trial court’s judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings pursuant to the applicable statutes.
Rehearing is denied.