Ex parte Jemison

31 Ala. 392
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided January 15, 1858·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

RICE, C. J.

— Where one of several plaintiffs is a resident of this State at the commencement of the action, and at the time a motion is made to dismiss the suit under section 2396 of the Code, for want of security for costs, the motion ought to be overruled. The resident plaintiff is liable to a judgment for costs; and in such case, that section of the Code does not authorize a dismissal of the suit, for the failure to give security for the costs before or at the time the action is commenced. — Ex parte Bush, 29 Ala. 50.

The motion is denied, at the costs of the petitioner.

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

Ex parte Jemison, 31 Ala. 392 (Ala. 1858).

31 Ala. 392 (Ex parte Jemison) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Taylor v. Morton
151 So. 853 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
Kellog ex rel. Monroe v. Bokee
1 Balt. C. Rep. 777 (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, 1898)
Eudora Mining & Development Co. v. Barclay
122 Ala. 506 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1898)
Kyle v. Perdue
95 Ala. 579 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1891)
Tuskaloosa Wharf Co. v. Mayor of Tuskaloosa
38 Ala. 514 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1863)