Bussey v. Br. Bank
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Montgomery. Before the Hon. Geo. Goldthwaite. This was a proceeding by notice and motion by defendant, against plaintiff in error and.one Findley, to recover the amount of a promissory note for $500, purporting to have made by them. Bussey and Findley severed in their pleas— the former pleading, the general issue, and the latter, non est Jactum.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Montgomery. Before the Hon. Geo. Goldthwaite. This was a proceeding by notice and motion by defendant, against plaintiff in error and.one Findley, to recover the amount of a promissory note for $500, purporting to have made by them. Bussey and Findley severed in their pleas— the former pleading, the general issue, and the latter, non est Jactum. The jury found against Bussey, and in favor of Findley, and the judgment of the court was in conformity with the verdict. Bussey moved in arrest of judgment, but the court overruled his motion, and this is now assigned as…
1Opinion of the CourtChilton, J.
In Turner et al. v. Lazarus, 6 Ala. Rep. 877, it is said that the act of 1818, (Clay’s Dig. 323, § 61, 62,) which declares every promissory note, &c. shall be construed to have the same effect in law as a joint and several note, &c., and makes it lawful to sue out process, and to proceed to judgment against any one or more of the makers, and which authorizes the plaintiff in a joint suit against several defendants, to discontinue as to such of them as have not been served with the process, &c., has never been held to authorize a judgment against one joint maker of a note, where all of them…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hall v. RochesterNew York Supreme Court · 1824
- Palmer v. SeveranceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
3Cited by1 opinion
- Park v. EdgeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868