Vance v. Wells & Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court ofRussell. Assumpsit by the defendant against the plaintiff in error. The declaration is upon a promissory note. The first count is in the usual form upon the note.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court ofRussell. Assumpsit by the defendant against the plaintiff in error. The declaration is upon a promissory note. The first count is in the usual form upon the note. In the second count, after declaring upon the note in the usual way, it proceeds to alledge that in consideration of her liability upon the note, and in consideration that the plaintiffs would indulge her for the space of three months without suit, the defendant pronounced to pay the sum due upon the note, on request, and an averment that the indulgence was given, and that on request she refuses to pay.…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
It is now objected that the Court should have sustained the demurrers to the replication to the second plea, because more than one replication to a plea is not allowed. It is true that this Court, in Gray v. White, 5 Ala. Rep. 490,and again in Stiles v. Lacy, 7 Ala. Rep. 17, held that to be the law, but the objection to this vicious pleading, has not been taken in such a way, that in can be noticed by this Court. The proper mode would have been, to move the Court to strike out all the replications but one, and the plaintiff wou'14 have been put to his election which he would retain; or it…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gray's adm'rs v. WhiteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1843
- Stiles v. LacySupreme Court of Alabama · 1844
3Cited by14 opinions
- Duncan v. HargroveSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
- Nelson v. DiffenderfferMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Thompson v. HudginsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Doss v. PetersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
- Grimball v. MastinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.