Smith v. Kolb

Supreme Court of Alabama

Smith v. Kolb

58 Ala. 645

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedDecember 15, 1877

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 58 Ala. 645 (Smith v. Kolb) 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

Smith v. Kolb, 58 Ala. 645 (Ala. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

MANNING, J.

1. Although, in regard to civil remedies, laws may be enacted which shall have a retroactive operation, the general rule is that they are not to be construed to produce that effect, unless it was manifestly the purpose of the legislature that they should. — Barnes v. Mobile, 19 Ala. 707; Kidd v. Montague, Ib. 624.

2. Such a construction can not be put on the act of April [647]*64719th, 1873, “ to amend sections 3101, 3102 and 3104 of the Bevised Code,” in relation to mechanic’s liens. And appellant not having acquired any such lien on the property, concerning which this suit was brought, none was created in his favor by the enactment, subsequently, of the act referred to. The property, therefore, can not be charged, in the hands of the subsequent purchaser, with the payment of the sum due to plaintiff for his services in erecting the building thereon.

Let the decree of the Chancellor be affirmed.

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

MANNING, J.

1. Although, in regard to civil remedies, laws may be enacted which shall have a retroactive operation, the general rule is that they are not to be construed to produce that effect, unless it was manifestly the purpose of the legislature that they should. — Barnes v. Mobile, 19 Ala. 707; Kidd v. Montague, Ib. 624.

2. Such a construction can not be put on the act of April [647]*64719th, 1873, “ to amend sections 3101, 3102 and 3104 of the Bevised Code,” in relation to mechanic’s liens. And appellant not having acquired any such lien on the property, concerning which this suit was brought, none was created in his favor by the enactment, subsequently, of the act referred to. The property, therefore, can not be charged, in the hands of the subsequent purchaser, with the payment of the sum due to plaintiff for his services in erecting the building thereon.

Let the decree of the Chancellor be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 Ala. 645, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-kolb-ala-1877.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack