Graham v. Gunn
This text of 45 Ala. 577 (Graham v. Gunn) 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
B. F. SAFFOLD, J.
The judgment was by nil dicit upon a complaint which describes the plaintiff in the margin as “ administrator of Moses Gunn, deceased,” and recites that the note sued on is the property of the plaintiff’s intestate.
The statement of the names of the parties to a suit, in the margin of the complaint, is made by the Code a part of the complaint. — Rev. Code, p. 673. This being so, it [578]*578sufficiently appears from the complaint that G. B. Gunn,. as the administrator of Moses Gunn, deceased, claims the amount due upon the note as assets of the estate of that intestate. — Agee v. Williams, 27 Ala. 644; Crimm’s Adm’rs v. Crawford’s Adm’r, 29 Ala. 623 ; Wagner & Hughes v. Chenault, 7 Ala. 677.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
45 Ala. 577, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/graham-v-gunn-ala-1871.