Cook v. Field
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the County Court of Mobile county. THIS was an action of assumpsit commenced by F. ¡C. lilis, the intestate of the plaintiff in error, in the County Court ’ Mobile, on the 5th February, 1840, as the assignee of one C. Fisher, on a note made to him for one thousand dollars, by the defendants in error, and one A. Henderson, as to whom, the suit was discontinued.
Read the full summary
Error to the County Court of Mobile county. THIS was an action of assumpsit commenced by F. ¡C. lilis, the intestate of the plaintiff in error, in the County Court ’ Mobile, on the 5th February, 1840, as the assignee of one C. Fisher, on a note made to him for one thousand dollars, by the defendants in error, and one A. Henderson, as to whom, the suit was discontinued. To a declaration in the usual form, the defendants pleaded, that at the April term, 1839, of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Alabama, á certain firm, using the name and style of Cook &…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
A recovery'of the debt sued for by a previous garnishment, may-' be either pleaded specially, or given in evidence under the general issue, in an action of assumpsit; it is unnecessary, therefore, to consider in this case whether the objection, that the Court, and not the jury, should have tried the issue under the plea of nul hiél record, is well taken, as the matter was submitted to the jury under the plea- of non assumpsit.
The defendants having produced the record of the judgment against Field, one of the defendants, who had been summoned as a garnishee, at the instance of a judgment…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Gulf American Fire and Casualty Co. v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1968
- American Mortgage Co. v. InzerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- McPhail & Co. v. HyattSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
- Smoot v. EslavaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
- Sharpe v. WhartonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.