Wright v. Minter
Supreme Court of Alabama
P. P. Wright had obtained a judgment before a justice of the peace of Tuscaloosa county, against W. J. hiinter, on a note for $31 75, made by him as security of one Enoch Elliott, who was a joint maker of the note with Minter, but who-was not sued. Minter appealed to the County Court, and there, Wright, the plaintiff, filed his declaration or statement, on the note.
Read the full summary
P. P. Wright had obtained a judgment before a justice of the peace of Tuscaloosa county, against W. J. hiinter, on a note for $31 75, made by him as security of one Enoch Elliott, who was a joint maker of the note with Minter, but who-was not sued. Minter appealed to the County Court, and there, Wright, the plaintiff, filed his declaration or statement, on the note. Minter pleaded that “ the note was founded upon a usurious consideration between the plaintiff and Elliott,” and that the defendant was only security. To this plea, the plaintiff replied, that “.it was not usuriously agreed by and…
1Opinion of the Court
By JUDGE TAYLOR.
It is insisted by the counsel for the plaintiff in error, 1st. That the replication is a sufficient answer to the plea; 2d. If it is not, that the plea is-insufficient., It is unnecessary to cite authorities to sustain the doctrine, that a replication which tenders an issue to the country, must deny the whole plea, and put in issue every material matter which, could be introduced in the defence under the plea. In this case, the plea is, that “ the consideration of the note” was usurious;~the replication, which professes to deny that plea, is, that “ it was not 'agreed by and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Waterman v. HaskinNew York Supreme Court · 1810
3Cited by3 opinions
- Magee v. CowperthwaiteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1847
- Elba Bank & Trust Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Emerson v. GalloupeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893