Gen. No. 23,101.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Abstract of the Decision.
1. Garnishment, § 100 * — when evidence sufficient to establish judgment. In an action of garnishment, the judgment on which the garnishment proceedings are based is established where an execution evidencing a return by the bailiff “no part paid and no part satisfied” is introduced in evidence, and. existence of the judgment is admitted by an officer of the defendant.
2. Garnishment, § 26* — what debts should be disclosed in answer of garnishee. Under section 5 of the statute on garnishment (J. & A. If 5940), relating to disclosure of debts by the garnishee in answer to interrogatories, a debt owing and due at the date of service, and a debt owing at the date of service which becomes due *345thereafter, and a debt owing and due at any time after the service of the writ, up to the date of the answer, are included.
*344Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Richardson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1917.
Affirmed on remittitur; otherwise reversed and remanded.
Opinion filed October 2, 1917.
Statement of the Case.
Action of garnishment by J. J. Heffernan for the nse of Rittenhouse & Embree Company, a corporation, plaintiff, against Breen & Kennedy, a corporation, defendant. From a judgment for plaintiff for $383.52, defendant appeals.
John J. Kelly, for appellant; Frank Hall Stephens, of counsel.
Adams, Crews, Bobb & Westcott, for appellee.
Mr. Justice McSurely
delivered the opinion of the court.
*3453. Gabnishment, § 63 * — what is duty of garnishee as to holding funds. It is the duty of the garnishee, pending the outcome of garnishment proceedings, to hold the difference between funds in its hands and an overdraft of the debtor.