# Wiley v. Murphree

> Supreme Court of Alabama · December 21, 1933 · 228 Ala. 64

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3225677

## Case

- **Full name:** Wiley v. Murphree.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Alabama
- **Decided:** December 21, 1933
- **Citations:** 228 Ala. 64; 151 So. 869; 1933 Ala. LEXIS 5
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Anderson
- **Judges:** Anderson, Thomas, Brown, Icnigiit
- **Cited by:** 16 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3225677

## Opinion text

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 .

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3225677. Public record. Not legal advice.