Boothe v. Shaw

108 So. 563, 214 Ala. 552, 1926 Ala. LEXIS 110
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided May 13, 1926·No. 7 Div. 602.·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

SOMERVILLE, J.

The allegations and exhibits of the bill of complaint are apt and appropriate for the relief sought; and, being confessed by the default of respondents, the trial court could not do otherwise than grant the relief and enforce the decree by writ of possession. Nor was there any ground presented upon which the court could have properly granted respondent’s petition to set aside the decrees rendered, and allow them to make answer and litigate the cause upon its merits. A party who ignores a summons and, without good excuse, neglects to make his defense at the proper time has no standing in any court when he seeks to avoid the resulting judgment or decree. Read v. Walker, 18 Ala. 324, 333.

The decrees and orders of the circuit court will, therefore, be affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and THOMAS and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.

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

Boothe v. Shaw, 108 So. 563, 214 Ala. 552, 1926 Ala. LEXIS 110 (Ala. 1926).

108 So. 563 (Boothe v. Shaw) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hilyer v. Fortier
227 So. 3d 13 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 2017)
Triple D Trucking, Inc. v. Tri Sands, Inc.
840 So. 2d 869 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 2002)
Phillips v. Randolph
828 So. 2d 269 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 2002)
Fountain v. Permatile Concrete Products
582 So. 2d 1069 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1991)
DaLee v. Crosby Lumber Co., Inc.
561 So. 2d 1086 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1990)
Bice v. Jones
236 So. 2d 718 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1970)
Fancher v. Fancher
80 So. 2d 248 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1955)