Crawford v. Slaton

133 Ala. 393
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 15, 1901
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 133 Ala. 393 (Crawford v. Slaton) 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
Crawford v. Slaton, 133 Ala. 393 (Ala. 1901).

Opinion

MoOLELLAN, C. J.

An action for penalties prescribed for a wrongful act or omission, though technically an action of debt, is not an action for the recovery of a debt contracted, but an action ew delicto for a tort. — Williams v. Bowden, 69 Ala. 433. The action brought by Slaton against Crawford for the penalties prescribed by section 4137 of the Code was of this sort. And against the judgment in such action whether for costs and damages for the plaintiff or for costs in favor of the defendant there is no exemption from levy and sale. — Northern v. Hanners, 121 Ala. 587. The circuit court erred in its rulings to the contrary. Its judgment will be reversed and the cause will he remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Jones v. Tarleton
75 So. 643 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1917)
L. & N. R. R. v. Perkins
56 So. 105 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1911)
Wright v. Sample
50 So. 268 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1909)
Johnson v. Collier
49 So. 761 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
133 Ala. 393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crawford-v-slaton-ala-1901.