Columbus Insurance & Banking Co. v. Hirsh
Columbus Insurance & Banking Co. v. Hirsh
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
Section 2444, of the Code of 1880, in providing that a garnishee shall answer within the first three days of the term, simply means that he shall answer by that time; that is to say, that he must answer before the close of the third day. It does not preclude him from answering before the term begins. If he does so answer it is a perfectly good answer and cannot be stricken out. Young v. The Orpheus, 119 Mass. 179. It is true that the service of the writ binds any money belonging to the defendant that he may receive between the time of service and the return day of the writ (Code 1880, § 2442), so that if the plaintiff desires a disclosure on this subject he may call for a fuller answer, but in such case a reasonable time must be given for amending the answer, even if it necessitates a continuance of the case. Such time was not here given.
Judgment reversed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Columbus Insurance and Banking Company v. Simon Hirsh
- Cited By
- 5 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 3. Garnishment. Answer. Time of filing. Under Code 1880, 2 2444, which, provides that garnishees shall answer within the first three days of the return term, they may answer before the term begins. 2. Same. , Receipts after answer. Further disclosure. Garnishments bind money received between the date of service and the return day, and if the plaintiff wishes a disclosure of this, he may demand a fuller answer. 3. Same. Time to amend answer. Practice. In the latter ease a reasonable time must be allowed to amend the answer, even if a continuance results; and one day is not enough if the garnishee’s domicile is in a distant county.