Grooms v. Hannon
This text of 59 Ala. 510 (Grooms v. Hannon) 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
The statute under which this suit was brought is highly penal.—Code of 1876, §§ 2222-3. The penalty is denounced against the mortgagee, who fails to enter satisfaction on the mortgage, under the circumstances shown in the statute. To recover a statutory penalty, the party complaining must bring himself within the letter of the statute; for such statutes are construed strictly.—Fairly v. Davis, 6 Ala. 375; Russell v. Irby, 14 Ala. 131; Jones v. Brooks, 30 Ala. 588; Connoly v. A. & T. Rivers R. R. 29 Ala. 373; 2 Brick. Dig. 464, § 6; Authorities on brief of counsel. The statute does not authorize the institution of a suit against the transferee of the mortgage.
The .remedy in this case being statutory and penal, and* the complaint showing on its face that the action is improperly brought against a person who is in no sense liable, the-complaint does not contain a substantial cause of action. Code of 1876, §3158. Under no allowable amendment or-change of pleadings can this action be maintained. A judgment recovered in this suit, would have been arrested or- reversed on error. Hence, no matter what rulings the City Court made against the plaintiff below, it was, at most, error-without injury. For such error this court will not reverse-1 Brick. Dig. 780, § 96.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
59 Ala. 510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grooms-v-hannon-ala-1877.