Loeb & Weil v. Richardson
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery, in Equity. Heard before the Hon. Tiros. M. Arrington. The appeal in this case is sued out from a judgment or decree of said court, sitting in equity, overruling a motion to dismiss the bill for want of equity; and that decree is assigned as error. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. — The bill is wanting in equity.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery, in Equity. Heard before the Hon. Tiros. M. Arrington. The appeal in this case is sued out from a judgment or decree of said court, sitting in equity, overruling a motion to dismiss the bill for want of equity; and that decree is assigned as error. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. — The bill is wanting in equity. If the complainant has any right of exemption in the crops, it is a legal right, and can only be asserted in the Probate Court, — O'Gonnerv. Ghamberlain, 59 Ala. 431; Gilbert v. Dufpree, 63 Ala. 331; Janney v. Buell, 55 Ala.…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
— In January, 1883, Julius Richardson executed two mortgages to Loeb & Weil, to secure to them the payment of two notes, amounting to four hundred and fifty dollars, with a provision for further advances, to the extent of one hundred dollars. These, to enable Richardson to make a crop on the plantation of which he was tenant. The subject of the mortgage was the crops to be grown, four mules, and a wagon. About 15th May, 1883,' Richardson, the mortgagor, died, intestate; and on 20th June, 1883, Michael Loeb, of the firm of Loeb & Weil, was appointed administrator of the estate. ILe, the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Tayloe v. BushSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Marx v. NelmsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- Hardin v. PulleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
- Barr v. CardiffCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903
- Naftel v. OsbornSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.