Southern Timber & Investment Co. v. English Manufacturing Co.
This text of 45 So. 206 (Southern Timber & Investment Co. v. English Manufacturing Co.) 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
— This was a suit by attachment by the appellee against the appellant, which is shown to be a foreign corporation. The judgment does not show any personal service on the defendant, nor any appearance; nor does it show that any jurisdiction to condemn the property attached was acquired'by publication according to the statute. The ex parte affidavit which is copied in the record cannot supply the statement of jurisdictional facts which should appear in the judgment entry. — Bitson é Sons v. Hood, 83 Ala. 331, 3 South. 746; V. & A. Meyer & Co.v. Keith, 99 Ala. 519,13 South. 500; Wilmerding v. The Corbin Banking- Co-., 126 Ala. 268, 28 South. 640; Southern Ry. Co. v. Wordy 123 -Ala.- 400, 26 South. 234, 82 Am. St. Rep. 129- As to the form and effect of such judgment, see Exchange Nat. Bank of Spokane v. Clements, 109 Ala. 270, 19 South. 814; Poulard v. Vacuum Oil Co., 109 Ala. 387, 19 South. 414; Kress v. Porter, 132 Ala. 580, 581, 31 South. 377.
The .judgment not disclosing the facts necessary to confer the jurisdiction on the court, the judgment of the court is reversed, and the cause remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
45 So. 206, 153 Ala. 644, 1907 Ala. LEXIS 190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-timber-investment-co-v-english-manufacturing-co-ala-1907.