Legal Opinion

Buchmann v. Turner

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 9, 1930No. 6 Div. 683PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.

Plaintiff sued defendant as executrix of the estate of Fred J. Buchmann, deceased, for recovery of $780.75 due by account, and recovered a judgment in the sum of $195, from which defendant prosecutes this appeal.

The complaint contained the simple count for money due by account, was in Code form, and sufficient. Alabama Lime & Stone Co. v. Adams, 218 Ala. 647, 119 So. 853. The statute of nonclaim has been treated and considered as defensive matter. McDougald’s Adm’r v. Dawson’s Ex’r, 30 Ala. 553; Pipkin v. Hewlett, 17 Ala. 291; Malone v. Hundley, 52 Ala. 147.

The case of Smith v. Fellows, 58…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Wynn v. Tallapoosa County BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  2. Wise v. OuttrimSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
  3. Smith v. FellowsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
  4. Alabama Lime & Stone Co. v. AdamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  5. Flinn v. ShacklefordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Merchants Nat. Bank of Mobile v. CotnamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  2. Kilgore v. KimbrellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
  3. Finlay v. KennedySupreme Court of Alabama · 1947
  4. O'Neal v. PeadenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  5. Dirago v. TaylorSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API