Foshee v. McCreary
| Decision Date | 13 June 1899 |
| Citation | Foshee v. McCreary, 123 Ala. 493, 26 So. 309 (Ala. 1899) |
| Parties | FOSHEE ET AL. v. MCCREARY ET AL. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from chancery court, Conecuh county; W. L. Parks, Chancellor.
Bill for an injunction by J. M. Foshee and others against Robert J. McCreary, George W. Etheridge, and S. L. Tisdale. From a decree dismissing the bill, the complainants appeal. Affirmed.
The bill in this case was filed by the appellants against the appellees. The following facts were averred in the bill: On August 20, 1892, the complainants signed a bond of one J. M Liles, who died before the filing of this bill, to contest with Robert J. McCreary the election to the office of tax collector of Conecuh county, as provided at that time by law. This bond was approved by the probate judge of Conecuh county on the day of its execution. The contest for the office of tax collector of said county between J. M. Liles and Robert J. McCreary was tried before the probate judge of Conecuh county, and decided adversely to said Liles; and from this decision of said probate court Liles appealed to the circuit court of Conecuh county, and on April 24, 1893, said circuit court of Conecuh county decided said contest adversely to said Liles, by dismissing it out of said court. Thereupon, on the 12th day of September, 1893, Robert J. McCreary, as plaintiff, for the use of officers of the court and witnesses, brought suit in the circuit court of Conecuh county against the complainants, as defendants on said bond for the costs in the contest of said election; it being averred in the complaint in said suit that the defendants had failed to pay the costs incurred in said contest. The plaintiff in said suit recovered judgment against the complainants in this bill, and upon said judgment execution was issued, and placed in the hands of the sheriff of Conecuh county for collection. It was then averred in the bill The bill then further averred "that at the time of the institution of the said contest by the said John M. Liles against the said Robert J. McCreary for the said office of tax collector of Conecuh county, and at the time of your orators entering into and executing their said bond for cost of contest in said contest case, and at the time of the approval said bond for cost, and the trial of said contest by the probate judge of Conecuh county, the statute laws of Alabama authorized and gave to said John M. Liles the legal right to institute...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Hanover Fire Ins. Co. v. Street
...a court of equity to enjoin the adverse party from enforcing such judgment." (Italics supplied.) 23 Cyc. 991 (x, b, 1); Foshee v. McCreary, 123 Ala. 493, 26 So. 309; Watts v. Gayle, 20 Ala. 817; Stinnett v. Bank of State at Mobile, 9 Ala. 120; 23 Cyc. 1010 (x, b, 9). There is a striking ana......
-
Vestavia Country Club v. Armstrong
...complainant, or that he was prevented by fraud from making such application. Collier v. Parish, 147 Ala. 526, 41 So. 772; Foshee v. McCreary, 123 Ala. 493, 26 So. 309; Waldrom v. Waldrom, 76 Ala. 285, 291; Sims v. Riggins, 77 So. 399. That is to say, the circumstances relied on to excuse fa......
-
Barton v. Burton Mfg. Co.
... ... fraud from making such application. Collier v ... Parish, 147 Ala. 526, 41 So. 772; Foshee v ... McCreary, 123 Ala. 493, 26 So. 309; Waldrom v ... Waldrom, 76 Ala. 285, 291; Sims v. Riggins, 77 ... So. 399. That is to say, the ... ...
-
Hardeman v. Donaghey
... ... of fault or neglect in respect of defenses which might have ... been interposed to prevent the judgment." Foshee v ... McCreary, 123 Ala. 493, 26 So. 309; Tillis v ... Prestwood, 107 Ala. 618, 18 So. 134; National Co. v ... Hinson, 103 Ala. 532, 15 So ... ...