From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chicago Car Advertising Company v. Gray

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Mar 11, 1946
328 Ill. App. 320 (Ill. App. Ct. 1946)

Opinion

Gen. No. 43,565. (Abstract of Decision.)

Opinion filed March 11, 1946 Rehearing denied March 25, 1946 Released for publication March 25, 1946

GARNISHMENT, § 114when would-be intervenor without right to funds remaining on deposit after garnishee bank had satisfied judgment. Debtor, judgment against whom was satisfied by garnishment of bank, held entitled to remainder of funds on deposit in bank as against would-be intervenor, since claim of right to intervene was based only on contract between person against whom judgment was rendered and would-be intervenor and such contract did no more than create relation of debtor and creditor (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1945, ch. 62, par. 11; Jones Ill. Stats. Ann. 109.294).

See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.

Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. JAY A. SCHILLER, Judge, presiding.

Reversed and remanded with directions. Heard in the first division, first district, this court at the October term, 1945.

McKinley Price, for appellant;

William McKinley and Paul E. Price, of counsel;

David H. Caplow and C.A. Caplow, for certain appellee;

Dent, Weichelt Hampton, for certain other appellee.


Not to be published in full. Opinion filed March 11, 1946; rehearing denied March 25, 1946; released for publication March 25, 1946.


Summaries of

Chicago Car Advertising Company v. Gray

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Mar 11, 1946
328 Ill. App. 320 (Ill. App. Ct. 1946)
Case details for

Chicago Car Advertising Company v. Gray

Case Details

Full title:Chicago Car Advertising Company, Appellee, v. Van Gray, also known as…

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, First District

Date published: Mar 11, 1946

Citations

328 Ill. App. 320 (Ill. App. Ct. 1946)
65 N.E.2d 484