Snodgrass v. Cabiness
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Madison, before the Hon. G. D. Shortridge. This was an action of detinue, instituted by Stephen Carter, and subsequently revived in the name of defendant in error, his assignee in bankruptcy, against the plaintiff in error, to recover the possession of two slaves, with damages for their detention.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Madison, before the Hon. G. D. Shortridge. This was an action of detinue, instituted by Stephen Carter, and subsequently revived in the name of defendant in error, his assignee in bankruptcy, against the plaintiff in error, to recover the possession of two slaves, with damages for their detention. It appeared by a bill of exceptions in the record, that the slaves in question were once the property of one George Swink, who died on the 15th March, 1838, and that said Carter purchased them at a regular sale made by the administrator on said S wink’s estate, on the…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
The first charge assumes, that if the slaves were the individual property of George Swink, to entitle the defendant to set up fraud in the sale by the administrator, it was necessary for him to show that the branch bank at Decatur was an execution creditor of Swink, or of one of the mercantile firms of which he was a partner. Conceding that it is not competent for a stranger to gainsay a judgment against a dead man until it is vacated or annulled by a direct proceeding, and still we think that such judgment must be inoperative as against his estate, which has passed to an administrator. The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Armstrong v. TolerSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
- Carrington v. CallerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1829
3Cited by2 opinions
- Swink's Adm'r v. SnodgrassSupreme Court of Alabama · 1850
- Lewis v. WellsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1874