Fuller v. McFarland
Tennessee Supreme Court
FROM JEFFERSON. Appeal from decree of the Chancery Court, April Term, 1871. H C. Smith, Ch. 1. That the Schedule of the Constitution of 1865 made void the act of May 6, 1861, under which the execution was issued and the levy made, and so rendered said levy null and void. 2. Decree was not supported by the proof. 1. The Schedule of 1865 did not have the effect claimed.
Read the full summary
FROM JEFFERSON. Appeal from decree of the Chancery Court, April Term, 1871. H C. Smith, Ch. 1. That the Schedule of the Constitution of 1865 made void the act of May 6, 1861, under which the execution was issued and the levy made, and so rendered said levy null and void. 2. Decree was not supported by the proof. 1. The Schedule of 1865 did not have the effect claimed. Besides, this Schedule was repealed by the Constitution of 1870. 2. The sufficiency of the proof on which the original decree was based is not before the court, citing Anderson v. Bank of Tennessee, 5 Sneed, 661; Eaton v.…
1Opinion of the CourtNicholsoN, C. J.
This is a bill of review, filed to review and reverse a decree rendered on the 6th of November, 1867, in the Chancery Court at Dandridge. The material error assigned as apparent in the decree of November 6, 1867, is, that it determines that an execution tested of the first Monday of September, 1863, was levied on property sufficient to satisfy the judgment, and that such levy was a satisfaction thereof and a release of Benley, who was a security in the judgment. It is said this was error, because the execution aforesaid was a nullity, having issued under the law passed after the 6th of May,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State Fair Ass'n v. TerrySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Orrick v. OrrickTennessee Supreme Court · 1956