Cost v. Genette
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error from Shelby Circuit Court — Before the Hon. A. Crenshaw. Assumpsit to recover the amounl of a note of hand executed by the defendants. It appeared that the note in question, was placed by the plaintiff in the hands of an attorney at law, for collection, who without the knowledge or consent of the plaintiff, paid over the same to Genette, in satisfaction of his (the attorney’s) own debt.
Read the full summary
Error from Shelby Circuit Court — Before the Hon. A. Crenshaw. Assumpsit to recover the amounl of a note of hand executed by the defendants. It appeared that the note in question, was placed by the plaintiff in the hands of an attorney at law, for collection, who without the knowledge or consent of the plaintiff, paid over the same to Genette, in satisfaction of his (the attorney’s) own debt. The court below gave judgment against the plaintiff, who assigned the same as error here. Cited 3 Am. Dig. 47 — 5 Randolph, 639 — 9 Johns. 263-r-6 Sergt. & Loub. 459 — 11 Johns. 464 — 10 Johns. 220.
1Opinion of the Court
By Mr. Justice Thornton : . ,
This -was an action brought by the present plaintiff,' against the defendant, in debt, for the amount of a promissory note; which, according to an agreed state of facts, the plaintiff had confided to the hands of an attorney at law for collection, and which, by an agreement between the said attorney and the defendant, had been surrendered to him in payment, and dis-sharge of the attorney’s own debt to the defendant. The. case of Gullet and Lewis, decided by the court at a former term, is considered to embrace the principle which ought. to govern this.
The counsel…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Wiley v. MahoodWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1877
- Chapman, Lyon & Noyes v. CowlesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1867
- McCarver v. NealeySupreme Court of Iowa · 1848
- Reconstruction Finance Corp. v. TroupSupreme Court of Iowa · 1943