McRae v. Juzan
Supreme Court of Alabama
At a special term of the Court of Chancery, sitting at Mobile, a motion was made requiring the appellant, who was the Register of that Court, to show cause why he had not issued a copy of the bill with’the subpoena, to be served on the defendant in the case of Pierre Juzan et al v. Theo. L. Toulmin. In answer to the motion the appellant showed for cause that the complainants refused on demand to pay him his fees for these services.
Read the full summary
At a special term of the Court of Chancery, sitting at Mobile, a motion was made requiring the appellant, who was the Register of that Court, to show cause why he had not issued a copy of the bill with’the subpoena, to be served on the defendant in the case of Pierre Juzan et al v. Theo. L. Toulmin. In answer to the motion the appellant showed for cause that the complainants refused on demand to pay him his fees for these services. The Chancellor adjudged the cause shown to be insufficient, and directed the Register to issue a subpoena accompanied with a copy of the bill. To revise this order…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
The only question in this case is, whether the Clerks of Courts previous, and as an inducement to the performance of the duties devolved on them by law, are enti-*287tied to demand their fees? The solution of this question must depend upon the construction of our statutes on the subject. Ordinarily, at law, the unsuccessful party is charged with costs and an execution issues for their collection; but in equity either party is chargeable with their payment.at the discretion of the Court. [Act of 1807, Aik. Dig. 261, 286.] So if in a suit determined, the execution shall be returned “ no property…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Lyon v. Hays' Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1857