Blount v. McNeill
This text of 29 Ala. 473 (Blount v. McNeill) 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.
Opinion
The case of Randolph t. Cook & Ellis, 2 Porter, 286, is distinguishable from this. In that case, the entire cause of action was immature at the commencement of the suit. In this case, only one of the three notes sued on was not due when the suit was commenced, and there is no other objection to the declaration. It is unnecessary, therefore, in the decision of this case, either to maintain or to overrule that decision. The declaration here contains a good cause of action; and if the defendant had resisted the judgment of the court below, either by plea or demurrer,' the defense would have been partial, going only to a part of the matter embraced in the declaration. Such a defense is not available in this court, when no objection was in any way made in the court below. — Code, § 2405.
The judgment of the court below is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 Ala. 473, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blount-v-mcneill-ala-1856.