(Laws 1814, Cobb's 1851 Digest, p. 72; Ga. L. 1855-56, p. 25, § 34; Code 1863, § 3235; Code 1868, § 3246; Code 1873, § 3322; Code 1882, § 3322; Ga. L. 1887, p. 40, § 1; Civil Code 1895, § 4569; Civil Code 1910, § 5115; Code 1933, § 8-801.)
Cross references.- Intervention generally, § 9-11-24.
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Intervention in action.
- Claimant who alleges being the true owner is permitted to intervene in an attachment action. Trax, Inc. v. Pentagon Aero-Marine Corp., 162 Ga. App. 276, 290 S.E.2d 196 (1982).
Construing O.C.G.A. §§ 18-3-15 and18-3-31 in pari materia, in light of the due process requirements, the intervenor has the same right to traverse the plaintiff's affidavit of attachment as the defendant, and once the affidavit of attachment is traversed, the procedure to follow is the same as that accorded the defendant. Trax, Inc. v. Pentagon Aero-Marine Corp., 162 Ga. App. 276, 290 S.E.2d 196 (1982).
Only issue in third-party claim requires determination of who has title.
- When property is levied on by virtue of attachment and is claimed by one not party to the attachment, the only issue on trial requires determination of who has title to the property. Bank of Manchester v. Universal Credit Co., 45 Ga. App. 233, 164 S.E. 95 (1932).
Prevailing party refusing to take property back and seeking value instead.
- When tortious levy is made upon property of one not party to the process, and one files statutory claim to the property one cannot, upon recovering judgment finding the property not subject, refuse to take the property back from the officer, and instead seek to hold person causing the levy liable for the property's full market value. Maxwell v. Speth, 9 Ga. App. 745, 72 S.E. 292 (1911).
To whom bond payable.
- When a claim for property attached is not interposed until after judgment on attachment, claim bond should be made payable to the sheriff as in other claim cases. Benton v. Benson, 32 Ga. 354 (1861).
Cited in James Selman & Co. v. Shackelford, 17 Ga. 615 (1855); Manufacturers' Fin. Acceptance Corp. v. Bradley, 50 Ga. App. 138, 177 S.E. 272 (1934); Rahal v. Titus, 107 Ga. App. 844, 131 S.E.2d 659 (1963).