Opinion

Smith v. Dannelly

  • 224 Ala. 592
  • 141 So. 569
  • 1932 Ala. LEXIS 150
Court
Supreme Court of Alabama
Filed
Apr 28, 1932
Status
Published
Author
Bouldin
On the bench
Foster, Anderson, Brown, Bouldin, Gardner, Thomas, Knight
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.2%

The opinion

BOULDIN, J.,

dissents, agreeing to the opinion that the motion may he made at any time before entering upon the trial, but holding that, upon proof that plaintiff is a nonresident, there is a mandatory duty upon the trial court to fix the time in which security for costs shall be given, and that, upon exception to his refusal to do so, the error is reviewable unon appeal from the final judgment. In his opinion, this is a well-settled rule of law in this state, and that the present decision overrules our cases so declaring, to wit, First National Bank v. Cheney, 120 Ala. 117 , 23 So. 733 , supra; Ex parte Bradshaw, 174 Ala. 243 , 57 So. 16 , supra; and is of the opinion that the case of Ex parte White, 213 Ala. 425 , 104 So. 844 , supra, being in. conflict with them, should be overruled.

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.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.