Legal Opinion

Hamill v. McCalla

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 11, 1934No. 6 Div. 376PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOSTER, Justice.

This is a bill in equity to foreclose a mortgage on real estate, and incidentally it seeks a deficiency judgment against both the mortgagor, who is the maker of the note, and also against the irregular indorser, who is appellant.

Appellant demurred on the ground that a deficiency judgment could not he rendered against him on his objection, because, in effect, his obligation is separate and distinct from that of the maker; in other words, that they are several and not joint debtors. His demurrer was overruled, and that ruling presents the only question for us to consider on this…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Little v. People's BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
  2. Winston v. BrowningSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
  3. Holczstein v. Bessemer Trust & Savings BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
  4. Tedder v. SteeleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
  5. Schillinger v. LearySupreme Court of Alabama · 1917

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Lee v. MacOn County BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
  2. Rhodes v. SchofieldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
  3. First Nat. Bank v. BonnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1943
  4. Wiggins Estate Co. v. JefferySupreme Court of Alabama · 1944
  5. Edge v. BiceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955

9 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