Elliott v. Clements
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writ of error to the County Court of Tuskaloosa. The judgment sought to be reversed, is as follows: “ Alsey Clements vs. William S, Elliott. j July 26th, 1841. This day came the plaintiff, Alsey Clements, by his attorney^ and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that the de-' fendant had received legal notice, and it also appearing to the satisfaction of the court, that the plaintiff had paid as ■ security for the defendant the sum of three hundred and six dollars…
Read the full summary
Writ of error to the County Court of Tuskaloosa. The judgment sought to be reversed, is as follows: “ Alsey Clements vs. William S, Elliott. j July 26th, 1841. This day came the plaintiff, Alsey Clements, by his attorney^ and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that the de-' fendant had received legal notice, and it also appearing to the satisfaction of the court, that the plaintiff had paid as ■ security for the defendant the sum of three hundred and six dollars and 52-100, for which a judgment was rendered against the defendant (principal) and the plaintiff, (security ;) and it…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
This proceeding is doubtless intended to conform to the act of 1821, “ supplementary to an act entitled an act for the relief of securities.” [Aik. Dig. 384.] Without reciting that statute at length, it is enough for the present case to say, *472that it authorizes sureties who have paid money for their principals on judgment or execution, to move the court in which the judgment was rendered, for a judgment for the amount paid, with interest thereon.
It is unnecessary to consider all the exceptions which have been taken by the plaintiff* in error to the judgment entry. It is clear that its defects…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Bloom v. RichardsOhio Supreme Court · 1853