From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Overton v. Hill

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1805
5 N.C. 47 (N.C. 1805)

Opinion

June Term, 1805.

Money paid into the office upon an execution cannot be attached in the hands of the clerk at the instance of a creditor of the plaintiff in execution. Motion to stop money in transitu, which has been paid into the office upon an execution at the instance of B, and to apply the money to the discharge of a judgment against B, is not allowed, of course, and will not be granted unless good cause be shown.

THOMAS OVERTON having recovered a judgment against John Hill, in Fayetteville Superior Court, execution was issued and the money levied, and on the return day of the execution the money was paid into the office. On same day the clerk of the court was summoned as a garnishee at the suit of Hector McAlister against the said Thomas Overton, on an attachment returnable to the County Court of Cumberland. The attorney in fact for Thomas Overton applied to the clerk for the money which had been paid into the office upon the aforesaid execution against Hill; and Patsy Glascock having recovered a judgment against the said Overton in the said court, which judgment remained unsatisfied, a motion was made to the court on her behalf, that the balance of the said money, after the judgment to be recovered upon the attachment aforesaid should be satisfied, should be applied towards the discharge of her said judgment. The case was sent to this Court upon the following questions: First, whether the money paid into the office upon the (48) execution against Hill was liable to be attached at the instance of McAlister, in the hands of the clerk; and, secondly, whether the court will apply the money paid into the office for Overton to the discharge of Patsy Glascock's judgment against him.


From Fayetteville.


The money paid into the office upon the execution against Hill cannot be attached at the instance of Overton's creditors; nor will the court apply this money to the discharge of the judgment which Patsy Glascock recovered against Overton, no reason being shown to the court why this money should be stopped in transitu, and such an application not being allowed as of course.

Cited: Hunt v. Stevens, 25 N.C. 365; Coffield v. Collins, 26 N.C. 491.

Overruled: Jeffreys v. Lea, 30 N.C. 96; Gaither v. Ballew, 49 N.C. 493; Williamson v. Nealy, 119 N.C. 341.


Summaries of

Overton v. Hill

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1805
5 N.C. 47 (N.C. 1805)
Case details for

Overton v. Hill

Case Details

Full title:OVERTON v. HILL

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jun 1, 1805

Citations

5 N.C. 47 (N.C. 1805)

Citing Cases

STATE v. LEA

But (96) this last is not obligatory on the court in every case. Overton v. Hill, 5 N.C. 47. Indeed, more…

Williamson v. Nealy

That for this reason the sheriff could not execute the attachments while the buggy was so in his custody, and…