Ritter v. Hoy
Alabama Court of Appeals
Appeal from. Birmingham City Court. Heard before Hon. C. C. Nesmith. Assumpsit by S. L. Hoy against C. D. Ritter and others. Judgment by default for the plaintiff and the defendant appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from. Birmingham City Court. Heard before Hon. C. C. Nesmith. Assumpsit by S. L. Hoy against C. D. Ritter and others. Judgment by default for the plaintiff and the defendant appeals. The complaint did not state a sufficient cause or right of action, and hence, will not support a default judgment, and this question may be raised on appeal for the first time. — Browder v. Gaston, 30 Ala. 677; Taylor v. Jones, 52 Ala. 78; Winnemore v. Matthews, 45 Ala. 449; Childress v. Mann-, 39 Ala. 206. “A cause of action” will be found defined in 6 Cyc. 705, and authorities cited. A suit on the note…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, P. J.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered by default, on the 25th day of April, 1910, on a complaint filed on the 26th day of January, 1910, which counted on a promissory note alleged to have been made by the defendants on the 1st day of February, 1910. It is to be observed that, according to the averments of the complaint, the note sued on was made after the suit was brought, and was not yet due at the time the judgment was entered.
*645A complaint which does not disclose a substantial cause of action affords no legal support for a judgment, and a judgment fatally defective because of the absence…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Tyson v. ChestnutSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
- Douglas v. BeasleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1866
- Browder v. GastonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1857
- Randolph v. CookSupreme Court of Alabama · 1835
3Cited by4 opinions
- Baker v. ClarkAlabama Court of Appeals · 1915
- Huntsville Grocery Co. v. JohnsonAlabama Court of Appeals · 1915
- Dunning v. Town of ThomasvilleAlabama Court of Appeals · 1917
- Potter v. TuckerAlabama Court of Appeals · 1914