Opinion

Wiley v. Murphree

228 Ala. 64
151 So. 869
1933 Ala. LEXIS 5

Court: Supreme Court of Alabama
Filed: Dec 21, 1933
Status: Published
Author: Anderson
On the bench: Anderson, Thomas, Brown, Icnigiit
Cited by: 16 cases

The opinion

ANDERSON, Chief Justice

(concurring).

I concur in the conclusion and result as I think the Madison county securities are bonds under the general definition of same. True, this court has drawn a technical distinction between county bonds, the issuance of which is regulated by the Constitution, and other evidences of indebtedness by the counties, yet instruments in question are unquestionably bonds. “A bond is an obligation in writing and under seal, binding the obligor to pay a sum of money to the obligee.” Gutta Percha & Rubber Mfg. Co. v. City of Attalla (Ala. Sup.) 39 So. 719 .

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.