Legal Opinion

Taylor v. Hoffman

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 13, 1935No. 7 Div. 318PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, Justice.

The bill is for discovery, accounting, redemption, and injunction. There were answers and cross-bills. The decree was for certain of the respondents, and only complainant appeals.

The decree rendered is in due form and substance responsive to the pleadings and evidence, and was duly filed and incorporated in the minutes of the court. Though that decree is not here shown to have been signed by the trial judge, it was efficacious. Section 6640, Code.

A phase of this case is reported as Taylor v. Hoffman et al., 229 Ala. 420, 157 So. 851.

Under the authority of section 6574 of the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Andrews v. GreySupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
  2. Caples v. YoungSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  3. McClurkin v. McClurkinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  4. Wood v. WoodSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
  5. Hamrick v. Town of AlbertvilleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Mosely v. KennedySupreme Court of Alabama · 1944
  2. Lucas v. LucasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1953
  3. Bonds v. BondsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
  4. LeFlore v. State Ex Rel. MooreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1972
  5. Patton v. Endowment Department of A. F. A. M.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1936

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API