Hicks v. Meadows
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Houston Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. W. R. Chapman. Bill by W. J. Hides against Joe Meadows and another to restrain the prosecution of a detinue suit for the recovery of a certificate of deposit. From a decree sustaining demurrer to the bill, complainant appeals
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
The appeal is taken from the ruling of the chancery court on demurrer to the original bill, praying that the appellees, Joe Meadows and Judge Meadows, be enjoined from prosecuting their suit in detinue pending in the circuit court, and from interfering'with appellant, W. J. Hicks, in the collection of the moneys alleged to be due him by the Bank of Ash-ford on a certain certificate of deposit, which certificate is in the following language:
“(Certificate Not Subject to Check of Deposit.)
“Bank of Ashford. No. 70.
“Ashford, Ala., Feb. 9th, 1912. $600.00
“W. J. Meadows has deposited in this bank…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Gerrish v. New Bedford Institution for SavingsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Minor v. RogersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1873
- Cooper v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
- Lucas v. PittmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- Kinnebrew's Distributees v. Kinnebrew's AdministratorsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1860
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Winsett v. WinsettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
- Decker v. FowlerWashington Supreme Court · 1939
- Hale v. KinnairdSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Alabama, Tenn. & Northern Ry. Co. v. Aliceville Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Jones v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.