Matthews v. Robinson

Supreme Court of Alabama

Matthews v. Robinson

20 Ala. 130

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedJanuary 15, 1852

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 20 Ala. 130 (Matthews v. Robinson) 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

Matthews v. Robinson, 20 Ala. 130 (Ala. 1852).

Pincite

Opinion

GOLDTHWAITE, J.

There was no error in tbe charge. If tbe agreement by tbe defendant in error, to pay all tbe debts of Matthews, could have been set up by tbe plaintiff in error, to protect himself against tbe rendition of tbe judgment against bim as garnishee, be did not insist upon it, but allowed judgment to go against bim. This judgment, so far as this motion is concerned, is conclusive. Tbe summary remedy substituted by our practice in tbe place of tbe audita querela cannot go behind it. Burt v. Hughes, 11 Ala. Rep. 571.

Tbe judgment must be affirmed.

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

GOLDTHWAITE, J.

There was no error in tbe charge. If tbe agreement by tbe defendant in error, to pay all tbe debts of Matthews, could have been set up by tbe plaintiff in error, to protect himself against tbe rendition of tbe judgment against bim as garnishee, be did not insist upon it, but allowed judgment to go against bim. This judgment, so far as this motion is concerned, is conclusive. Tbe summary remedy substituted by our practice in tbe place of tbe audita querela cannot go behind it. Burt v. Hughes, 11 Ala. Rep. 571.

Tbe judgment must be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 Ala. 130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthews-v-robinson-ala-1852.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack