Petty v. Walker
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the County Court of Mobile. Assumpsit by Petty against the Walkers, on a promissory note, dated 23d February, 1839., The pleas do not appear, but the parties in this court consent that the cause went to the jury on an issue upon the replication per fraudum to a plea of bankruptcy.
Read the full summary
Error to the County Court of Mobile. Assumpsit by Petty against the Walkers, on a promissory note, dated 23d February, 1839., The pleas do not appear, but the parties in this court consent that the cause went to the jury on an issue upon the replication per fraudum to a plea of bankruptcy. At the trial, the plaintiff read to the jury a notice served on the defendants, stating that their certificate of bankruptcy would be impeached for fraud, on the following grounds, viz : 1. For not surrendering to the assignee in bankruptcy, or setting forth in their schedule, certain property described in…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
1. It will be seen the issue in this case was, the fraud of the defendants in obtaining their discharge under the bankrupt act, and under the notice given them, the inquiry is confined to the matters therein stated. The first matter stated is, that the defendants did not set out in their schedule, or surrender to the assignee, certain pro - perty described in a deed of trust, executed by Daniel Walker to one Turner, of a particular date, and recorded in the office of the clerk of the county court. Considering this allegation as the assertion that the property covered by this deed was in *382the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hargroves v. CloudSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845
3Cited by1 opinion
- Griffin v. WallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858