58 Ga. 175 | Ga. | 1877
In attachment, founded on contract, where there has not been notice, replevy, or appearance, to give the court jurisdiction over the defendant’s person, and the plaintiff has, nevertheless, procured the court, without the intervention of a jury, to render a general judgment, such judgment is so far prima facie void as that the defendant may, at a subsequent term, file an issuable plea, on oath, to the action, without first moving to set the judgment aside. And while such plea is undisposed of, the plaintiff cannot ignore the appearance and pleading of the defendant, and have the judgment changed, by amendment, into a special judgment against the property attached. Defendant, by the express terms of the Code, section 3310, may appear and malee his defense at any time before final judgment is rendered against him; and so long as a judgment, obtained in his absence and without notice to him, is so defective that a sale under a fi. fa. conforming to it would be void, (52 Ga. 389,) it cannot be regarded as absolutely final, though it may not be absolutely void for all purposes.
In the present case, when the plaintiffs in attachment obtained their original judgment, they were entitled to a judgment against the property attached. Code, section 3328. But they took no judgment against that. They took a general judgment against the debtor in personam. This judgment was no absolute finality to the attachment proceeding. It was a legal non sequitv/r. The whole logic of the record had to be revised, and a different conclusion drawn. Before this revision took place, the premises were materially changed. The defendant appeared and filed an issuable plea on oath. After this had occurred, the plaint
Judgment reversed.