Supreme Court of Georgia, 1879

Warren v. Purtell

Supreme Court of Georgia · Decided September 15, 1879 · Bleckley

63 Ga. 428

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision. The 9 that cite it most often are listed here.

Aldana, Jose L. (Tex. App. 2015)
United States Ex Rel. Wallace v. Flintco Inc. (5th Cir. 1998)
Jose L. Aldana v. State (Tex. App. 2015)
Sims' Crane Service, Inc. v. Ideal Steel Products, Inc. (11th Cir. 1986)
Brawner v. Wilkins (Ga. Ct. App. 1966)
Baker v. Northwestern National Casualty Co. (Wis. 1965)
McBrien v. Starkweather (Ga. Ct. App. 1931)
Pearson v. Jones (Ga. Ct. App. 1916)
Cotton States Life Insurance v. Edwards (Ga. 1884)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Bleckley, Justice.

1. The claimant’s counsel no doubt reasoned well. The circumstances indicated that the case would not be reached,, or if reached, that it would not he tried so early in the term. But the presence or absence of parties and counsel when their cases are called in their order for trial, cannot be left to sound reasoning. Probability cannot be made the measure 'of progress in the dispatch of business. As we all know, sometimes there is a drag and sometimes a run ; and those having business to attend to in court must bear in mind that a wide variation from the average rate of progress may occur. Indeed, it is always probable that something improbable will happen.

2. For want of & primafacie case, the court may dismiss the levy,- but when such a case has been made by the plaintiff in fi. fa., he is entitled to a verdict unless it is overcome by claimant or the claim is withdrawn. We do not think it is the right of the court, much less its duty, to dismiss the claim merely because it is unsupported by any evidence.

3. The attachment should have been directed to all and singular the constables of this state. Code, §3273. But the direction was amendable, Id., §3316 ; and the levy was by a constable, and therefore a proper officer. Neither the writ nor the levy was void, the misdirection being curable.

Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.