Hart v. Forbes

Citations

• 60 Miss. 745

Syllabus

<p>1. Assignment. Notice and acceptance thereof. Q-arnishment. Priority.</p> <p>D. held a policy of insurance against loss by fire in the Western Assurance Company on a stock of goods. The goods were destroyed by fire. D. assigned the policy after the fire to H., to whom he was largely indebted, and delivered the policy and assignment to Ml, who was not the agent of H. for any purpose. The assignment had been placed on record by D., who also telegraphed to H. informing him of the assignment of the policy and asking his approval. H., as soon as he received notice of the assignment, telegraphed his assent thereto. D. had, before the fire, promised H. to secure his claim in any event. After the assignment had been placed on record, but before H. had received notice and signified his approval of the same, the Western Assurance Company were garnished under an attachment issued at the instance of 1?. & B. against D. H. claimed the proceeds of the policy under the assignment to him. Held, that the assignment did not vest title in H. so as to give his claim precedence over the garnishment served before he received notice of the transfer and signified his assent thereto.</p> <p>2. Attachment. Writ returned by constable. Receipt by interested sheriff.</p> <p>Where the return on a writ of attachment issued by a justice of the peace returnable to the Circuit Court shows that the writ was duly received and properly executed by the constable it is not a good objection to such return that there also appears upon the writ an indorsement of the receipt thereof by one of the plaintiffs, a sheriff, for the constable.</p>