Burnett v. Handley

8 Ala. 685
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJune 15, 1845
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 8 Ala. 685 (Burnett v. Handley) 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
Burnett v. Handley, 8 Ala. 685 (Ala. 1845).

Opinion

GOLDTHWAITE, J.

In point of fact,there is no contest here between the several creditors of Dossey as to the appropriation of the money. The sheriff, it seems, conceded his liability to sat[687]*687isfy the executions which had issued at the suit of Bettis and Matthews : whether this liability grew out of his neglect to require a claim bond from the claimant of the slave levied on, or from his omission to make the money from the other persons against whom as well as Dossey, these executions were issued, does not appear; nor is this material, because, if these creditors were now contesting the right of Handley to the money in the hands of his attorney, it could not be said their’s was superior. Handley has, in legal effect, done no more than enter into an arrangement with the claimant, in the nature of an accorded satisfaction of the condition of the claim bond executed by the latter. This right is personal to him, and is not affected, even if the other creditors had a paramount lien upon the slave. In this view of the case, it is unnecessary to determine whether the lien of the othér creditors was destroyed by the omission of the sheriff to require a claim bond on their executions.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Doster v. Manistee National Bank
48 L.R.A. 334 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 Ala. 685, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burnett-v-handley-ala-1845.