Beard, Wright & Hamil v. Woodard

78 Ala. 317
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedDecember 15, 1884
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 78 Ala. 317 (Beard, Wright & Hamil v. Woodard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Beard, Wright & Hamil v. Woodard, 78 Ala. 317 (Ala. 1884).

Opinion

SOMERVILLE, J.

The question raised in this case was expressly decided in Flexner v. Dickerson, 65 Ala. 129. It was there held that, in an attachment proceeding, issued to enforce the statutory lien for advances to make a crop,, under section .3286 of the Code, the affidavit must state the facts which bring the case within the law, by showing, among other averments, the nature of the articles advanced, whether “horses, tnules, oxen, or necessary provisions, farming tools and implements, or money to purchase the same.” The general averment, in such an affidavit, that the plaintiff' made advances to enable the defendant to make a crop for the current year, without averring in what such advances consisted, is insufficient.

The plea in abatement was properly sustained, and the judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ballard v. Stephens
92 Ala. 616 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1890)
Kyle v. Ward
81 Ala. 120 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 Ala. 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beard-wright-hamil-v-woodard-ala-1884.