Baum v. Bell

Citations

• 28 S.C. 201
• 5 S.E. 485
• 1888 S.C. LEXIS 39

Syllabus

<p>1. A caused the crops of B to be seized under a warrant issued upon an agricultural lien for rent, whereupon B gave bond and recovered the crops so seized. A then filed his complaint to recover the rent, and B moved to vacate the seizure upon the ground that the warrant had been irregularly and improvidently issued. The Circuit Judge granted the motion, holding that B was not indebted to A. Held, that the Circuit Judge erred in determining, on such a motion, the merits of the issues. Mu. Justice McIveb. dissenting.</p> <p>2. The affidavit to obtain a warrant of seizure under an agricultural lien, when made on information and belief, is insufficient, unless it states the facts upon which the belief is founded, and those facts are such as, if true, would be sufficient prima facie to warrant the belief. It must conform to the requirements of the affidavits in attachment.</p> <p>3. The affidavit is insufficient to sustain such a warrant, where its allegations, as to disposing of the crops, only are “that he has reason to fear, and does believe, that the debtor has disposed of, or is about to dispose of, his crops, the effect of which would defeat his lien,” and that the debtor had said that he had §325 in his pocket for the payment of the rent, but would not pay it until required by law to do so.</p>