Hobson-Starnes Coal Co. v. Alabama Coal & Coke Co.

66 So. 622, 189 Ala. 481, 1914 Ala. LEXIS 184
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 7, 1914
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 66 So. 622 (Hobson-Starnes Coal Co. v. Alabama Coal & Coke Co.) 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
Hobson-Starnes Coal Co. v. Alabama Coal & Coke Co., 66 So. 622, 189 Ala. 481, 1914 Ala. LEXIS 184 (Ala. 1914).

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

It affirmatively appears from the record certified for appeal that, prior to the attempted pronouncement of judgment against the garnishee, the Illinois Central Railroad Company, by the circuit court of Jefferson county, Ala., at the suit of Hobson-Starnes Coal Company (Alabama Coal & Coke Company, defendant), and within four months before the fidjudication of the Alabama Coal and Coke Company’s bankruptcy, the last-named entity was adjudged a bankrupt; [483]*483which event served to dissolve the attachment issued by the state court, and, in necessary consequence, forbade the rendition of judgment thereon against the garnishee, unless the trustee in bankruptcy invoked the retention of the lien of the attachment for the benefit of the bankrupt estate.—Bankruptcy Act, § 67f (U. S. Comp. St. 1913, § 9651f) ; Matter of Ala., C. & C. Co. (D. C.) 31 Am. Bankr. Rep. 387, 391, 210 Fed. 940.

Independent of — unaffected by — the practice act in force in Jefferson county’s circuit court, whereby the power of the court over final judgments is restricted to 30 days after their , rendition, that court, at any and all times, has the inherent power to remove from its records a void judgment.—Buchanan v. Thompson, 70 Ala. 401; Sweeney v. Tritsch, 151 Ala. 242, 44 South. 184.

The circuit court did not err in setting aside and vacating, by its order of June 28, 1913, the judgment by default theretofore rendered on May 10, 1913.

Affirmed.

Sayre, de Graffenried, and Gardner, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Pigford v. Billingsley
84 So. 2d 661 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1954)
Cullars v. Callan
59 So. 2d 608 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1950)
Griffin v. Proctor
14 So. 2d 116 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1943)
Ex Parte R. H. Byrd Contracting Co.
156 So. 579 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1934)
Dulin v. Johnson
113 So. 397 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1927)
Citizens Bank v. Heyward
142 S.E. 651 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1926)
Pickens v. Clark
84 So. 738 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 So. 622, 189 Ala. 481, 1914 Ala. LEXIS 184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hobson-starnes-coal-co-v-alabama-coal-coke-co-ala-1914.