108 So. 369 | Ala. | 1926
The bill is in the nature of a bill of interpleader. It is not interpleader under the former statute (Marsh v. Mut. Life Ins. Co.,
The remedy under the proceeding here is more adequate and effective to accomplish the full release of the garnishee and the adjustment of the respective claims between the numerous garnishing creditors to the fund in question. Complainant brings the fund into court, admits its liability, and asks that it be relieved of the vexatious and harassing necessity of adjusting the various and conflicting claims of the garnishing creditors against it and the fund in question. Each plaintiff in garnishment would have the right to contest the answer of the garnishee, thereby involving the garnishee in numerous controversies, which can be settled in this single proceeding, and certainly the rights of the plaintiffs in garnishment are not affected or prejudiced by such proceeding.
The right of the holder of the fund claimed by several creditors is not to be confused with that of the garnishee, the subject of the contest of the answer in Birmingham Nat. Bank v. Mayer,
There is no error in the ruling of the trial court, and the decree is affirmed.
Affirmed.
ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.