Legal Opinion

Mooney v. Walter

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 15, 1881PublishedCited by 14 opinions

.Appeal from Montgomery Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. H. Austill. The facts touching the points decided by the court are sufficiently stated in the opinion. (No briefs came to the hands of the reporter.)

1Opinion of the CourtSomeryille, J.

We can see no error in the decree of the chancellor, in this case, overruling the exceptions taken to the report of the register. These exceptions have reference to conclusions of fact drawn from the evidence, and the Rule of Chancery Practice requires, in such cases, that the party taking the exception should note the evidence, or parts of evidence, he relies on in support of such exception, “with such designation and marks of reference, as to direct the attention of the court to the same.” — Rule 93 of Chancery Practice, p. 174, Code, 1876. The purpose of this rule is to relieve the court…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mahone v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1863
  2. Branch Bank at Mobile v. StrotherSupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
  3. Eslava v. CramptonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Cobbs v. NorvilleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  2. Garland v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
  3. Haralson v. WhitcombSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
  4. Jones v. WhiteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  5. Ex Parte CairnsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API