Rochester v. Armour
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court, of Birmingham, in equity. Heard before the Hon. H. A. Sharpe. Ail the facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. (1.) Judgments rendered and confessions of judgment are not such preferences of creditors as are condemned by the statute. — Ins. Co. v. Foster, 58 Ala. 502; Holt v. Bancroft, 30 Ala. 193; Norman v. Walfersberger, 19 Pa. St. 59; Cummer sell v. Handbloom, 19 Mo. Apip. 274; Sampson v. Arnold, 19 Iowa, 479 ; Blakey’s Appeal, 7 Fa.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court, of Birmingham, in equity. Heard before the Hon. H. A. Sharpe. Ail the facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. (1.) Judgments rendered and confessions of judgment are not such preferences of creditors as are condemned by the statute. — Ins. Co. v. Foster, 58 Ala. 502; Holt v. Bancroft, 30 Ala. 193; Norman v. Walfersberger, 19 Pa. St. 59; Cummer sell v. Handbloom, 19 Mo. Apip. 274; Sampson v. Arnold, 19 Iowa, 479 ; Blakey’s Appeal, 7 Fa. St. 449. (2.) A debtor may prefer one or more creditors to the exclusion of his other creditors, provided it is done without…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, C. J.
This case comes before us on an appeal from a decretal order overruling a demurrer to the bill filed by F. D. Armour and others, against Rochester, as their alleged debtor. In this condition of the record, we must treat *434as true every averment of the bill which is well pleaded. So treating the bill, the following is a statement of the facts as it presents them.
Rochester was a retail merchant in Birmingham, and the complainants, Armour and others, who were wholesale merchants, were creditors of his in various sums, aggregating about one thousand dollars, due for merchandise sold to him, and due…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Preston v. SpauldingIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
- White v. CotzhausenSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Crawford v. KirkseySupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
- Hodges Bros. v. Coleman & CarrollSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Holt & Chambers v. BancroftSupreme Court of Alabama · 1857
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ala. Great Southern R. R. v. HillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Steiner & Lobman v. Parker & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Curran & Co. v. Olmstead & ScheuingSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Dadeville Oil Mill v. HicksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
- Pollak Co. v. Muscogee Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1895