Lowery v. Green

81 So. 676, 203 Ala. 8, 1919 Ala. LEXIS 103
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedMay 1, 1919
Docket5 Div. 714.
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 81 So. 676 (Lowery v. Green) 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
Lowery v. Green, 81 So. 676, 203 Ala. 8, 1919 Ala. LEXIS 103 (Ala. 1919).

Opinion

GARDNER, J.

Counsel for appellant insist that the bill as amended is multifarious, in that it seeks to have the conveyance here assailed declared a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, and in the alternative to have the same annulled as fraudulent and void. This is the only question presented upon this appeal.

The authorities relied upon antedate the adoption of the Code of 1907. It is now well settled by our decisions that, under the influence of section 3095 of the Code of 1907, such a bill is not subject to the objection of multifariousness. Smith v. Young, 173 Ala. 190, 55 South. 425; D. W. Baker et al. v. Gate City Coffin Co. (present term) 203 Ala. 6, 81 South. 674.

The dedree of the court below will be here alfilrmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, O. X, and MeCLELLAN and SAYRE, JX, concur.

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

Related

Federal Gas, Oil & Coal Co. v. Moore
161 S.W.2d 46 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1941)
Norville v. Seeberg
87 So. 164 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
81 So. 676, 203 Ala. 8, 1919 Ala. LEXIS 103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lowery-v-green-ala-1919.