Hutchisson v. Governor
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. Alex. McKinstry. 1. The court erred in overruling the demurrer to the declaration. The averment that the capias was “ marked and endorsed for bail,” was not sufficient. — 1 Saunders’ PI. & Ev. 188, 479; 2 Chitty’s Pleading 789, 446, and notes; Nightingale v. Wilcoxon, 15 E. C. L. R. 57; Sharpe v. Abbey, ib. 418. 2. The demurrer to the second plea should have been overruled.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. Alex. McKinstry. 1. The court erred in overruling the demurrer to the declaration. The averment that the capias was “ marked and endorsed for bail,” was not sufficient. — 1 Saunders’ PI. & Ev. 188, 479; 2 Chitty’s Pleading 789, 446, and notes; Nightingale v. Wilcoxon, 15 E. C. L. R. 57; Sharpe v. Abbey, ib. 418. 2. The demurrer to the second plea should have been overruled. The plea shows that the debtor was legally discharged. —Clay’s Digest 70 § 3. The act of 1839 authorizes one justice to hear such an application. The ease of…
1Opinion of the CourtChilton, C. J.
This was an action of debt by the defendant in error against Hutchisson and his sureties, as sheriff of Mobile County, brought upon his official bond, for an alleged escape permitted by the sheriff (Hutchisson) of one Henry Flcshman, then in his custody by virtue of bail process in favor of Cncsborough & Bowers.
Tuero was a demurrer to the declaration, upon the ground thac it did not sufficiently allege that the sheriff was required by tin; process placed in his hands to hold the party defendant to bail. The allegation is, that the capias “ was marked and endorsed for bail.” The demurrer was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Morrow v. WeaverSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845