P. & M. Bank v. Dundas
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writ of Error to the Chancery Court of Mobile. This was a bill of review filed by the defendants in error, seeking the revision of a decree, founded on a report of the register, which is alledged to be inconsistent, and erroneous, as also the decree.
Read the full summary
Writ of Error to the Chancery Court of Mobile. This was a bill of review filed by the defendants in error, seeking the revision of a decree, founded on a report of the register, which is alledged to be inconsistent, and erroneous, as also the decree. That William R. Hallett, exhibited a bill against the complainant, and others, to foreclose a mort-¡ gage which Audley H. Gazzam had executed, to secure to Hallett the payment of a certain sum of money — that a de-^ cree of foreclosure and sale was had — that the several dea fendants to the bill answered, acknowledging the validity of the…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
A bill of review lies for error apparent on the face of the decree, or for newly discovered evidence. [Story’s Eq. Pl. 224, § 407; Dexter v. Arnold, 5 Mason, 301, and cases there cited.] It is upon the first ground that this’ bill is filed, and it is material to notice that it is the established doctrine, that it will not lie for error merely in the judgment. That is properly revisable on error, or appeal; but it must be error apparent on the decree itself. In Perry v. Phelips, 17 Vesey, 178, Lord Eldon, after laying down the rule, and stating the distinction, between an erroneous judgment…
2Cited by15 opinions
- McCall v. McCurdySupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
- McDougald's Adm'r v. DoughertySupreme Court of Alabama · 1864
- Jones v. HendersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Graves v. BrittinghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
- Prickett v. SibertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.