City of Woodlawn v. Durham
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Jefferson Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. Alfred H. Benners. Bill by the city of Woodlawn against J. A. Durham,, to declare and enforce a lien on property abutting a street which has been improved by the city. Decree for respondent and complainant ¿ppeals. No brief came to the Reporter. No brief came to the Reporter.
1Opinion of the CourtMayfield, J.
The sufficiency of an answer to a bill in equity under our law and rules of chancery practice can be tested only by exceptions thereto. However,, *566defective, it cannot be stricken. A demurrer to an answer in equity is unknown to our chancery practice. Of course a cause in chancery can be set down for hearing on the bill and answer without taking proof. — May v. Williams, 17 Ala. 23; Glasser v. Meyrovitz, 119 Ala. 152, 21 South. 514; Chancery Rules, 35, 36, and 37 (2 Code 1907, pp. 1538, 1539); Sims, Ala. Ch; Pl. & Pr. § 514. The couit, therefore, properly disallowed complainant’s demurrer and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Glasser, Kuder & Ottensosser v. MeyrovitzSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- May v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
3Cited by13 opinions
- City of Birmingham v. WillsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
- Julian v. WoolbertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
- City of Mobile v. Gulf Development Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1965
- Day v. City of MontgomerySupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Grant v. City of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.