Branch Bank at Mobile v. Furness
This text of 12 Ala. 367 (Branch Bank at Mobile v. Furness) 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
One view is entirely decisive of [369]*369this cause, without entering upon the question decided by the chancellor, or those which are supposed to be presented by the bill and proofs in addition to it. It does not appear from any allegation in the bill, that the complainant has ever reduced the demand against Wymañ to judgment, and having recently held, in the cas<^ of Thomason v. Scales, supra, that none but a judgment creditor is entitled to redeem under the statute, the bill fails on that ground. The circumstance that the complainant has prosecuted his.mortgage to a foreclosure, does not place him in any better condition as to the debt, than if no proceedings on the mortgage had been had, as this would not prevent theclebtor from interposing the bar of the statute of limitations to a suit on the .mortgage debt, allowing that to have run, and possibly too as to any other defence.
Decree affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
12 Ala. 367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/branch-bank-at-mobile-v-furness-ala-1847.