Florence Building & Investment Ass'n v. Schall
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the District Court of Lauderdale. Tried before the Hon. W. P. Chitwood. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of Lauderdale. Tried before the Hon. W. P. Chitwood. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court. All parties interested in the matter in controversy, or the property sought to be charged with the lien may be made parties, and those not made parties, shall not be bound by the proceeding, or judgment therein. — Code, § 3030. A judgment is evidence of the facts it ascertains, only against parties to the record, and their privies. — Young & Co. v. Stoutz & Co., 74 Ala. 574. The court erred in overruling the motion of the defendant to exclude from the…
1Opinion of the Court
HEAD, J
Statutory real action by appellees to recover two city lots. Plea, not guilty. The plaintiffs claim title under a sheriff’s deed made on the 4th day of November, 1889, in pursuance of a sale u,nder execution, issued on a judgment which they obtained on the 6th day of September. 1889, against W. O. Coleman. They introduced this judgment and sheriff’s deed, and also conveyances of the two lots to Coleman by the Florence Land, Mining and Manufacturing Company, executed in November, 1888, and rested. At this point defendants moved to exclude the evidence on the ground that plaintiffs had…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Globe Iron Roofing & Corrugating Co. v. ThacherSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
3Cited by26 opinions
- Smith v. BachusSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
- Carl v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- Holman v. Childersburg Bancorporation, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2002
- Jackson Lumber Co. v. McCrearySupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
- Worthen v. State ex rel. VernerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.