Barnhill v. Teague
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from tbe Circuit Court of Pike. Tried, before tbe Hon. JOHN P. HubbaRD. cited Const, of Ala. Art. 4, § 2; Dane v. McArthur, 57 Ala. 448; Walker v. State, 49 Ala. 329; Day Shell Road v. O’Donnell, 87 Ala. • 376; Stewart v. Commissioners of Sale Go.,82 Ala. 209; Sandy v. State, 60 Ala. 18; Dillard v. Webb, 55 Ala. 468; Cooley’s Const. Lira. 364.
1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.
Certain bogs of tbe value of ten dollars were seized while running at large by James R. Teague, under tbe supposed authority of an act “to prevent stock from running at large in Pike County,” approved December 9, 1890, (Acts 1890-91, p. 59). A. M. Barnhill, claiming to be tbe owner of tbe stock so seized and held, brought an action of detinue therefor before a justice, and being cast in that court, appealed to tbe Circuit Court of Pike county, where tbe cause was tried without a jury, on tbe following agreement of tbe parties : “We agree .... that tbe bogs sued for were seized and taken in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ballentyne v. WickershamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Stein v. LeeperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
- Stewart v. Court of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
- Ramagnano v. CrookSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
- Bay Shell-Road Co. v. O'DonnellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Affholder v. State ex rel. McMullenNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
- Hawkins v. Roberts & SonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Ex parte Mayor of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Blakey v. City CouncilSupreme Court of Alabama · 1905
- Flowers v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.