Mullary v. Caskaden

1 Minor 20
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 15, 1820
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 Minor 20 (Mullary v. Caskaden) 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
Mullary v. Caskaden, 1 Minor 20 (Ala. 1820).

Opinion

By the Court.

Diminution is not to be presumed ; if it were, it would be easy to delay the determination-of a case.

2d. A paper cer. tified by the clerk ®fhial reactions was founded, but oyerais no part of the Record.

On the assignment of Error, the Chief Justice delivered the opinion of the Court. r

The only assignment is that final judgment by default was rendered for the penalty of a Bond. The declaration sets forth that the defendant below made his certain writing qb-Iigatory, &c. whereby he acknowledged himself to be indebted to the plaintiff’ in the sum of $ 15ft, to be paid when requested. , The clerk has copied a paper in the transcript immediately after the Sheriff’s return to the writ; but it is not set forth on Oyer, nor does it appear by the declaration, the indorsement of the writ (even if we considered the indorse-mentas part of the Record) or by any plea to be the writing on which the action was founded. . M therefore cannot be considered part of the Record-

Let the judgment be affirmed.

1 Chitty’s P. 15, 20, 24—214. 1 Saund. 233.

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

Related

Merchants' National Bank v. Grunthal
39 Fla. 388 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Minor 20, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mullary-v-caskaden-ala-1820.