Robinson & Ledyard v. Holt
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Macon. Tried before the Hon. James W. Lapsley. This action was brought by Robinson & Ledyard, suing as partners, against P. S. Holt; and was commenced by attachment, sued out on the 3d November, 1887, before the clerk of the Circuit Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Macon. Tried before the Hon. James W. Lapsley. This action was brought by Robinson & Ledyard, suing as partners, against P. S. Holt; and was commenced by attachment, sued out on the 3d November, 1887, before the clerk of the Circuit Court. The affidavit for the attachment was made by W. Thompson, “agent and attorney for said plaintiffs,” and stated that P. S. Holt is indebted to Robinson & Ledyard in the sum of $200, for rent and advances for the year _1887; that said amount is due by said P. S. Holt, to said Bobinson & Ledyard as landlords of said Holt, for…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, C. J.
We feel constrained to affirm the judgment of the Circuit Court in this case. The affidavit for attachment is fatally defective in substance. It avers a failure to pay rent, and for the advances, after they had matured, but fails to aver that demand had been made. It avers that the crop, or a part of it, had been removed from the place or premises without paying the rent and advances, but fails to negative the consent of the landlord. — Code of 1876, § 3472; Code of 1886, § 3061; Fitzsimmons v. Howard, 69 Ala. 590; Bell v. Allen, 76 Ala. 450.
The attachment was sued out in November, 1887,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. McBrideSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Fitzsimmons v. HowardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
- Bell v. AllenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
3Cited by2 opinions
- Barker v. Anniston, Oxford & Oxanna Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Ex parte Oehmig & WeihlSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890