
    ERSKINE ET AL. vs. COLE & CO. ET AL.
    APPEAL PROM THE PARISH COURT, POR THE PARISH AND CITY OE NEW-ORLEANS.
    Garnishees cannot plead a demand against the defendant, by way of exception to the right of the plaintiff to recover.
    The plaintiff in attachment will recover from the garnishees, whatever sum is shown to be in their hands, belonging to the defendant, at the time the attachment was levied.
    The plaintiffs obtained a judgment against the defendants, their original debtors, in a case in which M. & P. Maher, were summoned as garnishees, and all the funds of the said debtors attached in their hands. The latter pleaded a large claim against the common debtors, in compensation of the funds and property of the latter, attached in their hands, and claimed the right to oppose it to the plaintiffs’ demand.
    The parish judge instructed the jury to inquire, first, whether the garnishees were indebted to the defendant or not, at the time of the attachment: second, how much, if any 1 If the garnishees owed sufficient to cover the plaintiffs’ judgment, the verdict must be for the plaintiffs; and if not, for such sum as was proved to be in their hands at the time of levying and serving the attachment. They returned a verdict for the plaintiffs, upon which, judgment was rendered against the garnishees for two thousand and fifty dollars. The garnishees appealed.
    
      Garnishees cannot plead a demand against the defendant by way of exception to the right of the plaintiffs to recover.
    The plaintiff in attachment will recover from line garnishees, whatever sum is shown to be in their hands, belonging to the defendant, at the time the attachment was levied.
    This case was decided on the principles settled in the cases of Blanchard vs. Cole et al., and Yairin & Reel us. Cole et al., ante. 1'53, 160, 163.
    
      J. Slidell, for the plaintiffs and appellees.
    
      Preston, for the appellants,
   Mathews, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This case is nearly, if not precisely similar to those of Blanchard and Yairin et al. against the same defendants and garnishees. If there be any difference in the facts of the present case and those to which reference is now made, as lately decided by this court, it is favorable to the pretensions of the plaintiffs.

It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the Parish Court be affirmed, with costs.  