Legal Opinion

Smith v. D. Rothschild Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 26, 1924No. 4 Div. 102PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The bill is to declare void deeds and mortgage on the wife’s property as procured and given in securing the husband’s debts. The injunctive relief prayed against a pending suit in ejectment is denied in the sustaining of respondents’ demurrer to the bill.

The statute has often been construed, and' forbids the wife, directly or indirectly, to become surety for the husband. Code, § 4497; Leath v. Hancock, 210 Ala. 374, 98 So. 274; Morriss v. O’Connor, 206 Ala. 542, 90 So. 304; Little v. People’s Bank of Mobile, 209 Ala. 620, 96 So. 763; Vinegar Bend Lumber Co. v. Leftwich, 197 Ala. 352, 72 So.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Lamkin v. LovellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  2. Little v. People's BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
  3. Richardson v. StephensSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
  4. Elkins v. Bank of HenrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  5. Staples v. City Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1915

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Dewberry v. Bank of Standing RockSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  2. Lester v. JacobsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  3. Alabama Chemical Co. v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
  4. Morris v. WaldropSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  5. Fourth Nat. Bank v. WoolfolkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929

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