Moore v. Bradford
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writ oferro^ to the Circuit Court of Talladega.. . ASSUMPSIT by the indorsee, against the drawer of a bill .of exchange, for 610,0 dollars. The declaration contained two counts; the first, alleging the non-acceptance of the bill, protest and notice; and the second, the non-payment, as well as the non-acceptance with averments of protest and notice.
Read the full summary
Writ oferro^ to the Circuit Court of Talladega.. . ASSUMPSIT by the indorsee, against the drawer of a bill .of exchange, for 610,0 dollars. The declaration contained two counts; the first, alleging the non-acceptance of the bill, protest and notice; and the second, the non-payment, as well as the non-acceptance with averments of protest and notice. Each count was demurred to, and after demurrer, the plaintiff entered a nolle prosequi as. to the second count. -The first count alleges, no special venue as the place where the bill was drawn, but after stating its date, avers,' that…
1Opinion of the Court
GOLDTHWAÍTE, J.
1. The chief objection to this declaration, is that it does not sufficiently appear- where this bill of exchange was drawn, so as to enable the Court to determine whether it is.inland or foreign, which the plaintiff in error insists is necessary, as the statute gives a different rule for damages in either case. This is a matter which cannot well become a question on demurrer, as the bill will be presumed to be drawn at the place stated as the venue of the declaration, and is therefore shown to be' an inland bill.
2 and 3. The cause having been determined upon an issue, the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Moore v. CoolidgeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1835
3Cited by4 opinions
- Phillips v. AshworthSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Weir v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Drake v. Johnston & SeatsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1873
- Chambers v. WalkerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868