Dumas v. Hunter
28 Ala. 688
Opinion
The judgment of the court below was in favor of the appellee, and against the appellant and Jemes M. Cochran. The appeal bond misdescribes this judgment, and describes a judgment against the appellant only. If that bond does not support the appeal, there is nothing else to sustain it. That bond does not support the appeal, because the misdescription of the judgment is fatal. — Satterwhite v. The State, at the present term, and the authorities therein cited.’
The appeal is dismissed, at the costs of the appellant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dumas v. Hunter, 28 Ala. 688 (Ala. 1856).
28 Ala. 688 (Dumas v. Hunter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Strain v. Irwin
75 So. 151 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1917)
Burdine v. Mustin
33 Ala. 634 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1859)