Southern Timber & Investment Co. v. Creagh

45 So. 666, 154 Ala. 283, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 539
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedFebruary 4, 1908
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 45 So. 666 (Southern Timber & Investment Co. v. Creagh) 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
Southern Timber & Investment Co. v. Creagh, 45 So. 666, 154 Ala. 283, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 539 (Ala. 1908).

Opinion

TYSON, C. J.

There are two reasons why the judgment appealed from must be reversed:

The first is: It is shown by the record that the judgment is against a non-resident, without appearance or plea by defendant, and it is not shown that proof was made to the court of facts requisite to constitute notice by publication, as required by section 531, Code 1896.— Diston v. Hood, 83 Ala. 331, 3 South. 746; Trammell v. Guy, 151 Ala. 311, 44 South. 37; Southern Timber & Investment Co. v. Frank Poe, 153 Ala. 595, 45 South. 205.

The second is: The judgment is in personam, instead of in rem. When the service is not personal, attachment proceedings being in rem, no valid personal judgment can he rendered. — De Arman v. Massey, 151 Ala. 659, 44 South. 688.

Reversed and remanded.

Haralson, Simpson, and Denson, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Wheeler v. Strickland
60 So. 59 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1912)
Southern Timber & Investment Co. v. Gordon
45 So. 1037 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 So. 666, 154 Ala. 283, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-timber-investment-co-v-creagh-ala-1908.