Smith v. Robinson
This text of 11 Ala. 270 (Smith 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.
Opinion
It is assigned for error — 1. That the demand of the note and protest for non-payment were made previous to the maturity of the note. 2. That the suit being discontinued as to all the defendants but the one on whom the process was served, it operated a discontinuance of the action. 3. It was irregular to render a judgment by default after the defendant’s appearance. 4. The judgment of non-suit should not have been set aside without a notice to the defendant. 5 The judgment should not have been rendered without the intervention of a jury; but if this was permissible, the damages are larger than the cause of action warrants. 6. No judgment should have been rendered without a declaration.
[272]*272
The note does not indicate in what State “Macon,” (the place where it is made and dated,) is situated, nor does the declaration contain any allegation on this point. True, it is 11 payable at either of the banks in Macon," and if by this we are to understand incorporated institutions for the purpose of dealing in money, exchange, &c. it might be safely assumed that the place of payment was extra territorium; as we have no such bank at a place bearing that name in this State. But we cannot intend that “ Macon” is in one of the sister States, or in a foreign country, upon an inspection of what appears in the record before us. We know that we have a county of that name, and perhaps several villages. In this uncertainty of the record, we cannot conclude judicially, (however we may suppose the fact to be,) that the place [273]*273of payment is not in this State, and cannot know that by “ banks” something else was not intended than the term usually imports. There was no necessity for submitting the case to the jury, as upon writ of inquiry bto estimate the interest due according to the law of some other country, not indicated by the record. It devolves upon the plaintiff to show affirmatively the error of which he complains — all allowable presumptions are against him.
If the damages assessed are for a larger sum than the principal, and interest of the note declared on, the judgment will be here corrected at the costs of the plaintiff in error — in all other respects it must be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 Ala. 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-robinson-ala-1847.