Robinson v. Curry
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writ of error to the Circuit Court of Pickens. Action of debt by Robinson, for the use of McEwin against Curry and Haynee, as joint obligors, by a certain single bill.— The declaration contains two counts, in neither of which is there any profert in curia of the bill; but as an excuse therefor, there is an averment in the first count, that the defendants wrongfully and illegally obtained possession of the bill from the hands of one Maupin, then and there acting as attorney…
Read the full summary
Writ of error to the Circuit Court of Pickens. Action of debt by Robinson, for the use of McEwin against Curry and Haynee, as joint obligors, by a certain single bill.— The declaration contains two counts, in neither of which is there any profert in curia of the bill; but as an excuse therefor, there is an averment in the first count, that the defendants wrongfully and illegally obtained possession of the bill from the hands of one Maupin, then and there acting as attorney for the plaintiff, without lawful payment therefor; and which bill the said defendants, on demand, refused to return to…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldtiiwaite, J.
The excuse alleged in this declaration for the omission to make profert, traces the bill single to the possession of the defendant, and avers that possession to be tor-tious. It does not differ, in any respect, from Totty v. Nesbitt, [3 Term, 154,] or Mattison v. Atkinson, [ib.] In the first of these cases, the defendant had admitted in his answer to a bill in chancery, that he had executed the bond, and that it had been discharged by him; and in the other, the defendant had obtained and cancelled the bond under an award of arbitrators, which af-terwards was set aside. We do not perceive that…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Bell v. MooreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846