Legal Opinion
Murphy v. Merchants Nat. Bank of Mobile
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided February 20, 1941No. 1 Div. 125PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMAS, Justice.
The appeal presents questions touching the several garnishees, complainant and as respondent to the cross-bill, the Merchants National Bank of Mobile, as respondent and cross-complainant against Murphy and the garnishees.
The named garnishees were necessary parties in order that a final judgment might be rendered against all parties in interest, according to their respective liabilities and as insurers of the property in question. The garnishees were brought in -with Murphy as necessary parties by the answer and cross-bill of the Merchants National Bank of Mobile, appellee.
The…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Farmers' & Mechanics' National Bank v. DearingSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Barnet v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Kelly v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Schuyler National Bank v. GadsdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins. Co. of New York v. MurphySupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Reynolds v. First Alabama Bank of MontgomerySupreme Court of Alabama · 1985
- Tucker v. BrownWashington Supreme Court · 1944
- Lenore Williamson Burgess, Individually and as Guardian of the Estate of Ethel Jackson Williamson, a Non Compos Mentis v. Warren Jackson WilliamsonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
- City and County of Honolulu v. KamHawaii Supreme Court · 1965
- Childs v. JulianSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.