Seals v. Edmondson
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Barbour Circuit 'Court. Tried before Hon. H. D. Clayton. This was an action brought under the statute, by R. Q. Edmonson against D. M. Seals for the recovery of four bales of cotton, and was commenced on 28th April, 1881. As shown by the evidence, a warehouse in the city of Eufaula, owned and operated by the plaintiff for the storage of cotton, containing about seven hundred and fifty bales of cotton, was, on 25th December, 1880, with all the cotton stored…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Barbour Circuit 'Court. Tried before Hon. H. D. Clayton. This was an action brought under the statute, by R. Q. Edmonson against D. M. Seals for the recovery of four bales of cotton, and was commenced on 28th April, 1881. As shown by the evidence, a warehouse in the city of Eufaula, owned and operated by the plaintiff for the storage of cotton, containing about seven hundred and fifty bales of cotton, was, on 25th December, 1880, with all the cotton stored therein except about fourteen bales, destroyed by fire. Of the cotton stored in the warehouse at the time of the fire,' the…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
— This is a statutory action for thé recovery of chattels in specie — very like the common law action of detinue. On all questions material to be here inquired into, it is governed by the same rules as those which obtain in the action of detinue. In fact, it is the common law detinue, with some statutory additions. One controlling principle, in this form of action, is, that to maintain it, the plaintiff must have, as against the defendant, a present,.unqualified right to the possession of the chattel, in its pr.esent form. If there be any preliminary act, or condition precedent to be…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Hicks v. MeadowsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
- Tabler, Crudup & Co. v. Sheffield Land, Iron & Coal Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Humes v. Decatur Land Im. & Furnace Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Hall v. PoseySupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
- La Rue v. Loveman, Joseph & LoebSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.