Winslett v. McLemore's Adm'rs
Supreme Court of Alabama
Whit of error to the Circuit Court of Coosa. The defendants in error declared on a promissory note, payable to Elijah McLemore, their intestate; to which the defendant pleaded — 1. Non-assumpsit. 2. That the plaintiffs were not administrators, as alleged in their declaration. On these pleas, issues were joined, but not submitted to the jury.
Read the full summary
Whit of error to the Circuit Court of Coosa. The defendants in error declared on a promissory note, payable to Elijah McLemore, their intestate; to which the defendant pleaded — 1. Non-assumpsit. 2. That the plaintiffs were not administrators, as alleged in their declaration. On these pleas, issues were joined, but not submitted to the jury. A judgment was rendered in these words: “This day came the parties by their attorneys, and the defendant suggests, that the plaintiffs have resigned as administrators of Elijah McLemore; which fact being proven to the satisfaction of the court, and the…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
-The judgment entry in this case is in an unusual form, and its true mean.ng somewhat involved; but we think it must be thus interpreted, v,z: that the defendant, instead of insisting upon a trial of the issues, withdrew b s picas, and suggested and proved to the court, that the plaint.fR had rosgned the administration of the intestate’s estate. In such case, the court was not competent to try the suggestion without the plaintiffs’ assent, and the record d.scovers uoth.ng from winch their consent is inferable. In Hatch v. Cook. [9 Porter’s Rep. 177.] this court say, that when th • dentil of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Skinner v. FriersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846