Griffin v. State Bank
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Chancery Court of Talladega. Tried before the Hon. David G. Ligón, Chancellor. The answer of a corporation under its seal, when it negatives the bill, warrants the-dissolution of an injunction. — Hogan v. Br. Bank at Decatur, 10 Ala. Rep. 485.
1Opinion of the CourtDargan, C. J.
The plaintiff filed his bill against the-Bank of the State of Alabama and the sheriff of T alladega county, praying an injunction to restrain the collection of a judgment at law rendered in favor of the Bank against him. The answer of. *259the Bank is authenticated by its corporate seal, but is not verified by the oath of any one. Upon the coining in of the answer, a motion was made to dissolve the injunction, on the ground that the answer denied the equity of the bill. This motion was granted, and from the decree dissolving the injunction an appeal was taken to this court.
The only question…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Union Bank of Georgetown v. GearySupreme Court of the United States · 1831
- Lovett v. Steam Saw Mill Ass'nNew York Court of Chancery · 1836
- Fulton Bank v. New York & Sharon Canal Co.New York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Hogan v. Branch Bank at DecaturSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
3Cited by9 opinions
- Marsh v. MarshSupreme Court of Alabama · 1869
- Mobile & Montgomery Railway Co. v. Alabama Midland Railway Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Niehaus & Co. v. CookeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1901
- State Bank v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- Rainey v. RaineySupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.