Mobile Drug Co. v. McCullough
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
The order to revive the judgment did no more than reinvest the plaintiff with the right to have execution on that original judgment.
The statutes are that the assignee of a judgment or decree may by scire facias have the same revived in his name, as provided by statute (section 7870, Code); that there is presumption of satisfaction of said original judgment or decree after the lapse of 10 years “from the rendition of same without issue of execution,” etc. (section 7871, Code); that “no scire facias shall issue to revive a judgment or decree after the lapse of 20 years from its rendition”…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Field v. SimsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Baker, Fry & Co. v. IngersollSupreme Court of Alabama · 1861
- Henry v. State Ex Rel. RambowAlabama Court of Appeals · 1919
- Marx v. SandersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Draper, Matthis & Co. v. NixonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
3Cited by6 opinions
- Quill v. Carolina Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Second Nat. Bank of Cincinnati, Ohio v. AllgoodSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Eatman v. GoodsonAlabama Court of Appeals · 1951
- McLendon v. HepburnCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2003
- Jaffe v. LeathermanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.