Ide v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
GARDNER, Justice.
The argument here advanced in opposition to the mandamus petition is by counsel appearing amicus curise on behalf of one Greenleaf, who, it is insisted, was interested in the decree rendered, and desirous of having a review of the appeal in the ease of MeCraw v. Ide, pending on the docket of this court. Reliance is had upon Ex parte Randall, 149 Ala. 640, 42 So. 870, 872, where the holding was in effect that the beneficial owner of a chose in action or property, has the right to use the name of the person holding the legal title, in a suit to recover the money or property,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Ex parte PrintupSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Ex parte GraySupreme Court of Alabama · 1908
- Lyons v. HamnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
- Renfro Bros. v. Goetter, Weil & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Awbrey v. EstesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. GanttSupreme Court of Alabama · 1951
- Fisher v. Bankers' Fire Marine Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Mims v. Alabama Power CompanySupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- Brown v. OlssonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1949
- Martin v. CarrollSupreme Court of Alabama · 1952
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.