Montgomery & Florida Railway Co. v. McKenzie
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Montgomery. Heard before the Hon, John, A, Fosteb. The former report of these two cases sufficiently shows the nature of the original bills. — 85 Ala. 546. After the re-manclment of the cases the complainant filed an amendment to each of the bills, making the directors of the defendant corporations parties defendant, and averring that the same persons were the stockholders, directors and officers of the two companies; that by some fraudulent…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Montgomery. Heard before the Hon, John, A, Fosteb. The former report of these two cases sufficiently shows the nature of the original bills. — 85 Ala. 546. After the re-manclment of the cases the complainant filed an amendment to each of the bills, making the directors of the defendant corporations parties defendant, and averring that the same persons were the stockholders, directors and officers of the two companies; that by some fraudulent arrangement they have undertaken to discharge their liability on their stock subscriptions; that as directors of the…
1Opinion of the Court
STONE, 0. J.
This is the second appeal in these cases. 85 Ala 546. The main question presented and argued on the present appeal is the identical question we considered and decided on the former appeal. It involves the constitutionality of section 3545 of the Code of 1886 — of the right of a creditor at large without lien or judgment to maintain a bill “for the discovery of the assets of the debtor, subject to the payment of debts.” The contention is that the statute violates section 12 of our bill of rights, which ordains “that the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate.”
The present…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- McGhee v. Importers & Traders National BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Lehman, Durr & Co. v. GreenhutSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
- Lawson v. WarrenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
- Balls v. BallsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1888
- Miller v. Lehman, Durr & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1888
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cook v. New York Condensed Milk Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1892
- Cook v. Schmidt & ZieglerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892