Noble & Brother v. Hallonquist
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Chancery Court of Montgomery. Heard before Hon. Adam C. FELDER. The appellee, by next friend, on the 28th of September, 1872, filed her bill of review to correct an error apparent in the original suit, hereinafter referred to, between herself and the appellants, Noble & Brother, and others.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Chancery Court of Montgomery. Heard before Hon. Adam C. FELDER. The appellee, by next friend, on the 28th of September, 1872, filed her bill of review to correct an error apparent in the original suit, hereinafter referred to, between herself and the appellants, Noble & Brother, and others. The case made by the original bill was as follows: Complainant, at and prior to the 9th day of October, 1865, was a married woman, having a statutory separate estate, consisting of a legacy given her by the will of Henry Lucas, deceased. Her husband afterwards bought a plantation on a credit,…
1Opinion of the CourtBrickell, C. J.
In McDougald v. Dougherty, 39 Ala. 409, the doctrine in reference to bills of review was carefully and thoroughly considered, and we are disinclined *233to unsettle any principle therein declared. The present record presents the inquiry, what constitutes an error in a decree enrolled, which will justify and uphold a bill of reviewed ?
In the case of Perry v. Philips, Lord Eldon said: “The cases of error apparent found in the books, are of this sort; an infant not having a day to show cause, &c.; not merely an erroneous judgment.”
In O’Brien v. Connor, 2 Ball & Beatty, 154, the original bill had…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- McDougald's Adm'r v. DoughertySupreme Court of Alabama · 1864
3Cited by3 opinions
- Banks v. LongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
- Tankersly v. PettisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
- Rochelle v. RochelleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939