Ivey v. Coston & Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from tlie Circuit Court of Crenshaw. Tried, before the Hou. J. O. Bioiiardson. The appellant recovered judgment againt one Hamilton, upon which judgment an execution was issued. This execution! was levied upon two mules.
Read the full summary
Appeal from tlie Circuit Court of Crenshaw. Tried, before the Hou. J. O. Bioiiardson. The appellant recovered judgment againt one Hamilton, upon which judgment an execution was issued. This execution! was levied upon two mules. Thereupon the. appellees-, J. W. Coston & Co-, interposed a, claim to the mules so levied, upon, setting out in their affidavit of claim that the property so levied upon ivas- “not the property of said J. J. Hamilton * * * hut is the property of J. TV. Coston & Co., and that affiant, had' a just claim to the property levied upon.” The character of the claim of the…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, C. J.
The claim of Coston & Co. was not interposed under and in accordance with section 4145 of the Code, and therefore they were not entitled tlo recover as mortgagees, especially as the law day of the mortgage had not lapsed. Nor were they entitled to recover upon the title reserved by them in the sale to defendant in execution, for under that sale the defendant had at least the night to the possession and use of the property until the stipulated time for payment of the price, which time had not expired when the levy was made, nor when the claimi was interposed, nor, even, when the .trial -was…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Hall & Brown Woodworking Machine Co. v. Haley Furniture & Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1911
- Bennett v. McKeeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1905
- Choctaw Bank v. DearmonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Drennen Co. Department Stores v. BrownSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
- Gulf Coast Lumber Co. v. MilesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.