Legal Opinion

Fourth Nat. Bank v. Woolfolk

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 17, 1929No. 3 Div. 892Published

1Opinion

On Rehearing.

THOMAS, J.

The statute providing for the taxing of 10 per cent as damages when there is affirmance on appeal of judgment rendered for money, whether debt or damages (section 6153, Code), does not apply here. This judgment was rendered against a claimant in interpleader, where the defendant has not the money.

The case of Caldwell v. U. S. F. & G. Co., 205 Ala. 463, 465, 466, 88 So. 574, is in point —there was supersedeas to hold up funds as here, and it was remarked that no summary judgment for damages could be rendered. This is the effect of Mrs. Woolfolk’s application on point in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dent v. FoySupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
  2. Caldwell v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  3. Smith v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API