Steamboat Thompson v. Lewis & Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Horn Alex. McKiNStry. This was a proceeding in admiralty, instituted by Wm. H. Lewis & Co., against the steamboat J. JR. Thompson, to enforce a claim for materials and repairs amounting to ¡$188 62. An account, showing the different items of which the debt was composed, extending from the 21st December, 1855, to the 19th March, 1856, was annexed to the libel.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Horn Alex. McKiNStry. This was a proceeding in admiralty, instituted by Wm. H. Lewis & Co., against the steamboat J. JR. Thompson, to enforce a claim for materials and repairs amounting to ¡$188 62. An account, showing the different items of which the debt was composed, extending from the 21st December, 1855, to the 19th March, 1856, was annexed to the libel. The libel was filed on the 26th March, 1856; and alleged, that the debt accrued within six months last past, and that the sum of $188 62 was still due and unpaid, “besides interest…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
— The recital of the facts in this case, as found in the bill of exceptions, is not as full as could be desired. The copy of the account exhibited with the libel and complaint shows the dates when the several articles were furnished to the boat, but it is nowhere shown when the account was due. In the absence of an agreement or custom to the contrary, a debt for goods purchased is generally due and payable presently. — See Waring v. Henry & Mott, 30 Ala. 721; Shields v. Henry & Mott, at June term, 1857; Darby v. Steamboat Inda, 9 Mo. 645. Possibly the rule as applicable to this account is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Waring v. HenrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1857
- Darby v. Steamboat IndaSupreme Court of Missouri · 1845
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hudson & Thompson v. BarrettAlabama Court of Appeals · 1917