Valenzuela v. Sellers

It was error to allow complainant to withdraw a paragraph of the bill as amended, without giving respondents notice and hearing on the application, respondents being regularly in court, by their solicitors, at the time. Bevis v. Wishart,30 Ala. App. 568, 10 So.2d 47; Equity Rules, 39-45; Crimm v. Crimm,211 Ala. 13, 99 So. 301. It was error to allow amendment striking one of the parties respondent without notice to respondents in court. Author, supra; Farmers St. Bank v. Inman,208 Ala. 281, 94 So. 105; Smith v. Smith, 212 Ala. 132,101 So. 903; Howton v. Jordon, 154 Ala. 428, 46 So. 234. It was…