Taylor v. Jones

52 Ala. 78
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJanuary 15, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 52 Ala. 78 (Taylor v. Jones) 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
Taylor v. Jones, 52 Ala. 78 (Ala. 1875).

Opinion

JUDGE, J.

This suit was instituted to recover damages for the conversion of personal property, alleged by the plaintiff in his complaint to’be the statutory separate estate of his wife.

Under section 2525 of the Revised Code, as construed in Pickens & Wife, v. Oliver (29 Ala. 528), and other cases decided by this court, the wife alone can sue for the corpus of property thus owned by her, or for damages to the property itself as distinguished from its use.

The facts averred in the complaint clearly show that under the law of this State, which has been settled as above stated, no right of action existed in the husband for the injury complained of, — not even jointly with his wife; the right of action was in the wife alone.

This having been the aspect of the case, the judgment of the court below should have been arrested when the defendant’s motion was made for that purpose. The motion was not within the influence of section 2811 of the Code, which prohibits any judgment from being “ arrested, annulled, or set aside, for any matter not previously objected to, if the complaint contain a substantial cause of action; ” for the complaint on which the judgment was founded contained no cause of action whatever in favor of the plaintiff. This having been the condition of the [79]*79case, the defendant was authorized to take advantage of it at any stage of the proceedings. Cummins v. Gray, 4 Stew. & Port. 397.

If the defect was one which could be cured by an amendment, we would reverse the judgment and remand the cause; but inasmuch as no amendment could be made which would put the case in better plight for the plaintiff, our duty is to render a judgment here arresting and annulling the judgment of the circuit court, and dismissing the suit. Let it be so entered.

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

Related

Ahrens-Rich Auto Co. v. Beck & Corbitt Iron Co.
103 So. 556 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1925)
Griffin v. Fowler
82 So. 653 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1919)
Linam v. Jones
134 Ala. 570 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1901)
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Williams
113 Ala. 402 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1896)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
52 Ala. 78, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-jones-ala-1875.