Tennessee Valley Bank v. Clopton
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Rule 46 of Chancery Practice, Code of 1923, vol. 4, p. 920, providing that “an amendment to a bill, or the filing of an amended bill, shall not set aside a decree pro confesso as to any defendant to the original or any other bill, nor shall a decree pro confesso for want of an answer to-an amendment or an amended hill operate as a decree pro confesso on the original or any other amended hill already answered,” is not in conflict with the statutes regulating amendments to bills in equity, Code 1923, §§ 6558-6561, and was not abrogated by Acts 1915, p. .705, the provisions of which were…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Kelly v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Staples v. BarretSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- Goodwater Warehouse Co. v. StreetSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
- H. H. Hitt Lumber Co. v. TurnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
- MacKe v. MacKeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Standard Contractors Supply Co. v. ScotchSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
- Hurt v. KnoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Ex Parte WaldropSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Ex parte HelblingSupreme Court of Alabama · 1965
- Woods v. Allison Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1952
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.