Ex parte Remson
Supreme Court of Alabama
Motion for a mandamus to the judge of the third judicial circuit, presiding in the county of St. Clair. The facts upon which the motion is predicated, are as follows : At the Spring term, 1852, of the Circuit Court of Talladega County, there was pending in said court a suit in favor of Ezekiel McCrary v. David H. Remson, in which, as appears by the record exhibited to the eourt, the following order was made at that term: “ In this cause, on application of the plaintiff, and…
Read the full summary
Motion for a mandamus to the judge of the third judicial circuit, presiding in the county of St. Clair. The facts upon which the motion is predicated, are as follows : At the Spring term, 1852, of the Circuit Court of Talladega County, there was pending in said court a suit in favor of Ezekiel McCrary v. David H. Remson, in which, as appears by the record exhibited to the eourt, the following order was made at that term: “ In this cause, on application of the plaintiff, and for good and sufficient cause to the court now shown, a change of venue is ordered by the court, and by consent of the…
1Opinion of the CourtLigon, J.
The only question presented for our consideration is, does the order made by the Circuit Court of Talladega County, as shown by the record, amount to a change of venue, in the case mentioned in it, to the county of St. Clair ? If it does not, then it is clear the Circuit Court of the latter county has no jurisdiction of the case, and should have stricken it from the docket on the motion of the counsel for the defendant.
The order of the Circuit Court of Talladega, made on motion of the plaintiff, directs, in general terms, that the venue be changed, but designates no county in which it shall…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Ex parte RemsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1857
- Ex parte McLendonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858