Watson v. Brazeal
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Wilcox. Assumpsit by the plaintiff against the 'defendant in error, on a promissory note, dated 20th July, 1836, for the payment, three days after date, of five hundred and seventy-nine dollars. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit, payment, and the statute of limitations.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Wilcox. Assumpsit by the plaintiff against the 'defendant in error, on a promissory note, dated 20th July, 1836, for the payment, three days after date, of five hundred and seventy-nine dollars. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit, payment, and the statute of limitations. To the last plea, the plaintiff replied, that the promissory note mentioned in the declaration, “ was made, executed and delivered to the plaintiff in the State of South Carolina, where the plaintiff now resides, and that the said defendant removed out of said State, before the expiratioff of…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The facts recited in the replication to the defendant’s plea of the statute of limitations, certainly tendered an immaterial issue. It is probable that the fact intended to be put in issue, was that the defendant had not resided six years within the State of Alabama, which, according to the decision of this Court, Towns v. Bardwell, 1 S. & P. 37, would have been a good replication to the plea. The replication, in this case, merely asserts, that the note was made in South Carolina, and that the defendant moved from that State before six years had expired, after the making of the note. That…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hazard v. PurdomSupreme Court of Alabama · 1836
3Cited by8 opinions
- Allison v. LittleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Glass v. Meyer, Son & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- Masterson v. GibsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
- Howell v. HairSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- McKinnon v. LessleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.