Hurt v. Blount
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Bussell. Heard before the Hon. N. S. Graham. The' bill in this case was filed on the 6th July, 1877, by Joseph G. Blount, against John W. Hurt; and sought to foreclose a mortgage on a tract of land, which was thus described in the bill: “a mortgage on one thousand and twenty acres of land, more or less, described as follows: section twenty-four (24), township fourteen (14), and range twenty-eight (28); also, the north half of section…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Bussell. Heard before the Hon. N. S. Graham. The' bill in this case was filed on the 6th July, 1877, by Joseph G. Blount, against John W. Hurt; and sought to foreclose a mortgage on a tract of land, which was thus described in the bill: “a mortgage on one thousand and twenty acres of land, more or less, described as follows: section twenty-four (24), township fourteen (14), and range twenty-eight (28); also, the north half of section twenty-five (25), township fourteen (14), range twenty-eight (28), and a part of section nineteen (19), township fourteen (14),…
1Opinion of the Court
BRICKELL, 0. J.
In Holly v. Tell, adm’r, &c., at the present term, we held, that a decree final, founded on a decree pro confesso, rendered on publication against a non-resident, was not reversible, because the complainant was not required, before executing the decree, to give the bond prescribed by section 3834 of the Code of 1876; nor was it a reversible error, that the chancellor did not direct a copy of the decree to be sent to the defendant.
2. Tbe description of the mortgaged premises, in the original bill, is not vague or indefinite. The greater part of them are described by the survey…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Chadwick v. CarsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Thompson v. SheppardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Hews v. HewsMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Steele v. WalkerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896