Oxford Iron Co. v. Spradley

42 Ala. 24
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided January 15, 1868·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

BYED, J.

This case must be reversed upon the authority of the following decisions of this court. — Planters’ & Merchants Bank of Huntsville v. Walker, Minor 391; Lyon et als. v. Lorant & Krebs, Adm'rs, 3 Ala. 151; Wetumpka & Coosa R. R. v. Cole, 6 ib. 655.

We are satisfied that a mere recital in the judgment-entry of the return of the sheriff does not relieve this case from the influence of the decisions cited. Such a recital is not equivalent to a judicial ascertainment of the facts necessary to sustain the judgment by default. It does not appear by the record that the appellant had an appearance entered in the court below.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

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

Oxford Iron Co. v. Spradley, 42 Ala. 24 (Ala. 1868).

42 Ala. 24 (Oxford Iron Co. v. Spradley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

American Bonding Co. v. New York & Mexican Whiting Co.
66 So. 847 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1914)
H. H. Hitt Lumber Co. v. Turner
65 So. 807 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1914)
Ex Parte National Lumber Mfg. Co.
41 So. 10 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1906)
Washington County v. Porter
128 Ala. 278 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1900)
Independent Publishing Co. v. American Press Ass'n
102 Ala. 475 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1893)
Cloud v. Inhabitants of the Town of Pierce City
86 Mo. 357 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1885)
G., H. & S. A. R'y Co. v. Gage
63 Tex. 568 (Texas Supreme Court, 1884)
Caro Bros. v. O. & C. R. R.
10 Or. 510 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1883)
Kelley v. Mississippi Central R.
1 F. 564 (U.S. Circuit Court, 1880)