Legal Opinion
Hardy v. Gissendaner
District Court, M.D. Alabama
Decided January 29, 1974No. Civ. A. 4120-NPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
VARNER, District Judge.
This class action brought pursuant to Rule 23, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, is submitted for final judgment on the stipulated facts. The Plaintiffs bring this action in their own behalf and in behalf of other mortgagors similarly situated, who have been subjected to the alleged repair-mortgage-assignment scheme as set out and discussed more fully in the facts below. Because the Code of Alabama, Title 7A, § 3-305, protects a holder in due course from certain defenses good against other holders, Plaintiffs contend that the said statute unconstitutionally…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Reitman v. MulkeySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Allgeyer v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver of Twin City Savings, Fsa v. Robert L. McCullough and Mary Nan McCulloughCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
- Hunt v. NationsCredit Fin. Servs. Corp.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2004