Legal Opinion
Rountree v. Satterfield
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided May 15, 1924No. 8 Div. 604PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
The bill was for foreclosure of a mortgage on land.
The agreement and appearance of counsel bring all necessary parties before the court under General Acts 1911, p. 589, amending section 2884 of the Code of 1907. L. ,& N. it. R. Co. y. Shikle, 206 Ala. 494, 90 South. 900; Sherrod v. McGruder, 209 Ala. 260, 96 South. 78; New Morgan County B. & L. Ass’n v. Plemmons, 210 Ala. 16,*97 South. 46; Smith v. Collier, 210 Ala. 23, 97 South. 101.
Was the bill as amended, excepting, as it does, defendants Charles Rountree and Roun-tree Lumber Company from the claim for attorneys’ fees, free from the grounds…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Hodge v. JoySupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Louisville N. R. Co. v. ShikleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Truss v. MillerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
- Ford v. BordersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Langley v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Lavretta v. First Nat. Bank of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Flagg v. Florence Discount Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Ezzell v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Tennessee Coal, Iron R. Co. v. JourdanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Roberts v. FergusonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.