Huggins v. Ball
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Bon. John Bragg. 1. The act of 1840 is repealed by the act of 1848.' A subsequent statute will control a former act which is repugnant to it, and it makes no difference that one is a general act and the other special. — -21 Pick. 878; 4 ib, 899; 3 Ala, 626; 3 Me-Lean, 212; 7 Blackf. 314,; 7 Mass. 140 ; 12 ib. 545 ; 1 Ash: mead, 179 ; 10 Pick. 39; 20 ib. 407. The language of the act of 1848 is plain and unambiguous, and…
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Bon. John Bragg. 1. The act of 1840 is repealed by the act of 1848.' A subsequent statute will control a former act which is repugnant to it, and it makes no difference that one is a general act and the other special. — -21 Pick. 878; 4 ib, 899; 3 Ala, 626; 3 Me-Lean, 212; 7 Blackf. 314,; 7 Mass. 140 ; 12 ib. 545 ; 1 Ash: mead, 179 ; 10 Pick. 39; 20 ib. 407. The language of the act of 1848 is plain and unambiguous, and leaves no room for construction. The intention of the Legislature must be collected from the words .which they employ. —…
1Opinion of the CourtColeman, J.
The proceeding and judgment in this c.as$ were had under the act of 1840, authorizing the clerk of the Supreme Court, in the name of the successful party, to commence and prosecute auy motion against any sheriff or liis securities for failing to return any execution from the Supreme Court. By a further provision of the act, and those acts to which it refers, .r.ko plaintiff was entitled to recover against the sheriff' the .amount of the execution which he failed to return.
It is contended that this ac't was repealed by the act of 1848, which declares that ‘.‘from and after the passage of this…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Underwood Typewriter Co. v. Marengo County BankAlabama Court of Appeals · 1919