Mead v. Daniel
Supreme Court of Alabama
This was an action before a Justice of tbe Peace-in Blount county, for forcible entry and detainer.— On the trial before tbe Justice, a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff in error. The defendants having taken the case to the Circuit Court by certiorari, assigned, among other causes— 1st. That the complaint did not specify the land with sufficient certainty, nor the estate of the plaintiff therein. 2d. That sufficient evidence was not recorded.
Read the full summary
This was an action before a Justice of tbe Peace-in Blount county, for forcible entry and detainer.— On the trial before tbe Justice, a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff in error. The defendants having taken the case to the Circuit Court by certiorari, assigned, among other causes— 1st. That the complaint did not specify the land with sufficient certainty, nor the estate of the plaintiff therein. 2d. That sufficient evidence was not recorded. The Circuit Court reversed the judgment of the-Justice, aud the plaintiff took his writ of error to- this-Court.
1Opinion of the Court
By Mr. Justice Thornton.
This was a proceeding had before a Justice of the Peace, instituted upon the complaint of the plaintiff in error, for a forciblé entry and detainer, by the defendants. The proceedings were brought into the Circuit Court of Blount county, according to the statute regulating such case, by writ of certiorari, where various errors were assigned, upon which, the judgment of the Justice was reversed. From this judgment of the Circuit Court, a writ of error has been taken to this Court. The assignment of errors here* *87involves the same matters, which were adjudged below. Of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Townsend v. Van AspenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1863
- State v. ScogginSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1850