McNutt v. King
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Shelby. Tried before the Hon. William S. Mudd. The facts are stated in the opinion. 1. The fourth plea is, in substance and in fact, a plea in abatement, and it should have been verified by oath.—1 Chitty PI. 462-3. The plaintiffs might have treated it as a nullity, and would not thereby have waived anything.—16 Johns. 307; 1 Chitty, 463. 2. Tbe plea in abatement sets up tbe fact that Joseph H. Jourolman, one of tbe plaintiffs, has brought…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Shelby. Tried before the Hon. William S. Mudd. The facts are stated in the opinion. 1. The fourth plea is, in substance and in fact, a plea in abatement, and it should have been verified by oath.—1 Chitty PI. 462-3. The plaintiffs might have treated it as a nullity, and would not thereby have waived anything.—16 Johns. 307; 1 Chitty, 463. 2. Tbe plea in abatement sets up tbe fact that Joseph H. Jourolman, one of tbe plaintiffs, has brought suit in tlie name of J. H. Jourolman. Such a plea is frivolous, and ongbt to have been stricken out by the court on its…
1Opinion of the Court
BRICKELL, C. J.—
This was an action of trover, commenced by the appellants, McNutt and Jourolman, on the 20th day of September, 1871, as surviving partners of A. G. Jackson, deceased, for the conversion, by the defendants in 1863, of two hundred and eight bales of cotton. Several pleas in abatement were filed, to one of which a demurrer was interposed, and overruled. No judgment was however rendered on either of these pleas, but pleas in bar were subsequently filed, and there was issue joined, a jury and verdict for the defendants. The fourth plea in bar avers that before the commencement of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cotten v. RutledgeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Leach v. GreeneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Stodder v. Grant & NickelsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1856
- Lacy v. RockettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1847
- Callison v. LemonsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1835
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Home Telephone Co. v. FieldsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- Barksdale v. Strickland & HazardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Tucker v. Henderson's Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
- Power Grocery Co. v. HintonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
- Parnell v. Southern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1917