Johnson v. First National Bank

40 So. 78, 145 Ala. 378, 1906 Ala. LEXIS 440
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided February 8, 1906·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

DENSON, J.

In the summons the plaintiffs are described as A. S. Johnston, W. D. Nesbitt, and W. D. Carr, partners as Johnston, Nesbitt & Co., and the coinplaint [379] follows the summons. This made the suit one by the plaintiffs as individuals, and not one in the name of the partnership; the word:-; “'partners as Johnston, Nesbitt & Co.” being merely deseriptio personae. — Baldridge v. Eason, 99 Ala. 516, 13 South. 74 ; Compton v. Smith, 120 Ala. 233, 25 South. 300 ; Bolling v. Speller, 96 Ala. 269 ; 11 South. 300. Moreover the suit could not have properly been brought in the name of the partnership.— Moore v. Burns, 60 Ala. 269 ; Lanford v. Patton, 44 Ala. 584.

The certificate of the clerk shows the appeal was taken by a partnership, and not by the plaintiffs, as designated in the summons and complaint. It follows that we cannot entertain the appeal, and it must he dismissed. Appeal disndssed.

Haralson, Tyson, Simpson, and Anderson, JJ., concur.

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

Johnson v. First National Bank, 40 So. 78, 145 Ala. 378, 1906 Ala. LEXIS 440 (Ala. 1906).

40 So. 78 (Johnson v. First National Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Reynolds v. Scott
60 So. 2d 690 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1952)
State Ex Rel. Palmer v. Gray
111 So. 242 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Greenstein v. 1st National Bank
47 So. 1036 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1908)