Barnett v. Ring

Citations

• 55 Miss. 97

Syllabus

<p>1. Attachment. Jurisdiction. Defendant’s residence.</p> <p>When a writ of attachment, returnable to the Circuit Court of a certain county, is levied upon property of the defendant in that county, and duly returned, the court has jurisdiction of the case, although the defendant may reside in a different county.</p> <p>2. Same. Practice. Consolidation of suits.</p> <p>There were two attachment suits in which the parties were the same, and the writs returnable to the same term of the same court, and, upon motion of the plaintiff in attachment, defendant in error here, the court ordered the cases to be consolidated. Held, that the action of the court cannot be pronounced erro-, neous, at the instance of the plaintiff in error, the defendant in attachment, as no harm was done him.</p> <p>3. Same. Return by constable to circuit court. Alias writ. Jurisdiction.</p> <p>Section 1437 of Revised Code of 1871 provides that, “ if an attachment writ, returnable to the Circuit Court, be executed by a constable, coroner, or marshal of a city, or by a person specially appointed for that purpose, the writ, with the return thereon, and all property and effects levied on, shall forthwith be handed to the sheriff of the proper county, who shall be responsible for the property so seized,” etc. Under this statute, if a constable serve the writ and return it to the Circuit Court, it will give the court no jurisdiction; but if he sell the property whilst in his hands, the court can acquire jurisdiction, and also secure the avails of the property in the constable’s hands, by an alias writ directed to the sheriff, and served on the constable as garnishee. .</p>