16 Ala. 828 (Ala. 1849), Spence v. Simmons

Citation16 Ala. 828
Opinion JudgeDARGAN, C.J.
Party NameSPENCE v. SIMMONS ET AL.
AttorneyRICE & MORGAN, for plaintiff in error: L. E. PARSONS, for defendants.
Judge PanelCHILTON, J., not sitting.
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

Page 828

16 Ala. 828 (Ala. 1849)

SPENCE

v.

SIMMONS ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June Term, 1849

Error to the Circuit Court of Coosa. Tried before the Hon. Geo. D. Shortridge.

RICE & MORGAN, for plaintiff in error:

L. E. PARSONS, for defendants.

DARGAN, C.J.

A judgment should show the plaintiff who recovers, the defendant against whom the recovery is had, and the specific thing or amount of money recovered; without these requisites it is no judgment, and no process can issue on it to enforce its satisfaction.--Ordinary v. McLure, 1 Baily, 7; Boykin v. The State, 3 Yerger 426.

A judgment nisi, or a conditional judgment, must possess these material requisites, for the final judgment is but a confirmation of the conditional jndgment, and cannot differ from the judgment on condition. The conditional judgment must be capable of confimation.--Dickinson v. Walker, 1 Ala. 48.

Tested by these rules there is manifest error. The judgment ni si in this case does not show any recovery, or in whose favor it was intended that a recovery should be had. The recitals are: "This day came the parties by their attornies and Solomon Spence being called to come into court and give evidence in behalf of the defendants, came not but made default, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that Spence has been duly subp naed to appear at this term of the court and give evidence as aforesaid; on motion of defendant's attorney, it is ordered by the court that a forfeiture of one hundred dollars be entered against said Solomon Spence for such his default, and that the same be made final at the next term of this court, unless said defaulting witness shall then appear and show cause to the contrary." This entry does not show a recovery in favor of any one, and cannot be considered a judgment.

The final judgment, therefore, rendered on this entry, must be reversed.

CHILTON, J., not sitting.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • 71 Ala. 233 (Ala. 1881), Tanner v. Thomas
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court of Alabama
    • Invalid date
    ...can be regarded as possessing no more legal efficacy than so much waste paper.--Freeman on Judgments, § § 50-52, 54; Spence v. Simmons, 16 Ala. 828; Gayle v. Singleton, 1 Stew. The demurrer was, without doubt, properly sustained, and there was no error in dismissing the bill of appellants. ......
  • 60 Ala. 271 (Ala. 1877), Clarke v. Jack
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court of Alabama
    • Invalid date
    ...128; 5 Ala. 770; 32 Ala. 13; 50 Ala. 561. The proceedings are not final, and therefore are not revisable.-- Waters v. Coker, 39 Ala. 730; 16 Ala. 828; 9 Porter, 274; 19 Ala. 198; 3 Ala. 323; 1 Root, Conn. 201; 4 Porter, 83; 1 Stewart, 183; 40 Cal. 479; 38 N. J. Law, 377; 43 Barbour, 2. The ......
  • 57 Ala. 209 (Ala. 1876), Speed v. Cocke
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court of Alabama
    • Invalid date
    ...in itself, without reference to anything else by which to ascertain its meaning.-- Dickerson v. Walker, 1 Ala. 48; Spence v. Simmons, 16 Ala. 828. It must appear to be the act of the court; if the court is exercising judicial power, the adjudication by the court, the sentence it pronounces;......
  • 61 Ala. 539 (Ala. 1878), McArthur v. Dane
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court of Alabama
    • Invalid date
    ...Smith, 5 Ala. 206. A judgment should show the specific amount of money recovered. Without this requisite, it is no judgment. Minor, 185; 16 Ala. 828. The specific amount of money recovered, as shown by the judgment has been paid. The judgment has been satisfied, and this execution should be......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • 61 Cal. 557, 6,208, Crosby v. Dowd
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • October 12, 1882
    ...merely personal judgment. See also: Joseph v. Joseph's Legatees , 5 Ala. 280; Turner v. Dupree's Adm'r , 19 Ala. 198; Spence v. Simmons , 16 Ala. 828; Church v. Chambers, 3 Dana, 275 ( C. C. P., § 577); People v. Cone , 48 Cal. Foreclosure proceedings which simply refer to a deed for descri......
  • 41 So. 10 (Ala. 1906), Ex parte National Lumber Mfg. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • April 28, 1906
    ...and hence no valid final judgment can be predicated on it. Goode v. Holcombe, 37 Ala. 94; Drane v. King, 21 Ala. 558; Spence v. Simmons, 16 Ala. 828; Lowry v. Clements, 9 Ala. 422; Dickerson v. Walker, 1 Ala. To authorize a judgment by default against a corporation, the record must show tha......
  • 5 So. 452 (Ala. 1889), Flack v. Andrews
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • February 5, 1889
    ...rendered by the court against defendant. The material requisites of a sufficient judgment are well settled. As said in Spence v. Simmons, 16 Ala. 828, "a judgment should show the plaintiff who recovers, the defendant against whom the recovery is had, and the specific thing or amount of......
  • 71 Ala. 233 (Ala. 1881), Tanner v. Thomas
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court of Alabama
    • Invalid date
    ...can be regarded as possessing no more legal efficacy than so much waste paper.--Freeman on Judgments, § § 50-52, 54; Spence v. Simmons, 16 Ala. 828; Gayle v. Singleton, 1 Stew. The demurrer was, without doubt, properly sustained, and there was no error in dismissing the bill of appellants. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT