Pleasants v. Erskine
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Madison. Tried before the Hon.'Henry C. Speake. . This action was brought by Samuel Pleasants and Robert S. Pleasants, against Mrs. Susan C. Erskine; and was commenced on the 12th April, 1873. Robert Pleasants having disclaimed any interest in the suit, his name was struck out by amendment; and Samuel Pleasants having died, the action was revived in favor of his wife as administratrix.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Madison. Tried before the Hon.'Henry C. Speake. . This action was brought by Samuel Pleasants and Robert S. Pleasants, against Mrs. Susan C. Erskine; and was commenced on the 12th April, 1873. Robert Pleasants having disclaimed any interest in the suit, his name was struck out by amendment; and Samuel Pleasants having died, the action was revived in favor of his wife as administratrix. The action was founded on certain bonds, or promissory notes under seal, executed by the defendant, jointly with other persons, who were not sued in this action; which bonds…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, C. J.
— -By amendment of the complaint, this became a suit in favor of Samuel J. Pleasants, plaintiff, and *388Susan C. Ersldne, defendant. The plaintiff died, and the suit was revived in the name of his widow as administratrix. These are the sole parties to the record. The right of recovery is based on certain promises to pay money, styled in the complaint bonds, because they were executed with the signature and seal of the maker, although, in fact, mere money obligations. Among the defenses set up were sworn pleas, that the said bonds were not the property of plaintiff, and that plaintiff was not the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Gulf City Shingle Manufacturing Co. v. BoylesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900
- Gambill v. CargoSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- Park-Robertson Hardware Co. v. CopelandAlabama Court of Appeals · 1914