Earbee v. Wolfe
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit court of Sumter. Assumpsit, tried before Chapman, J. It appears from the record in this case, that the defendants in error, who were plaintiffs below, filed with their “declaration, and sealed thereto a promissory note, of which the following is a copy, to wit: “ $2426 25-100. New York, 21 September, 1836. “Fifteen months after date, we, the subscribers, of liivingston, Sumter co. State of Alabama, promise to pay to the order of Wolfe and Clarks, (at the…
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit court of Sumter. Assumpsit, tried before Chapman, J. It appears from the record in this case, that the defendants in error, who were plaintiffs below, filed with their “declaration, and sealed thereto a promissory note, of which the following is a copy, to wit: “ $2426 25-100. New York, 21 September, 1836. “Fifteen months after date, we, the subscribers, of liivingston, Sumter co. State of Alabama, promise to pay to the order of Wolfe and Clarks, (at the branch of the State Bank of Ala. at Mobile,) twenty-four hundred and twenty-five 25-100 dollars, for value received,…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
This assignment does not arise out of what is properly a part of the record. The note, with its endorsements, does not appear to have been made such by the pleadings, or any proceeding had in the Cir cuit court. It cannot, then, be regarded in any other light, than as evidence filed by the defendants in error* to show their cause of action.
B.ut if we were authorised to consider the note and'em dorsement as of record in the case, the objection of a want of title in the defendants, would not avail the plaintiff. In Pitts vs. Keyser & Keyser, (1 Stew. Rep, 154,) it was decided, that where the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Beeson v. LippmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875