Rainer v. Moseley
Decision Date | 01 March 1951 |
Docket Number | 4 Div. 616 |
Citation | 255 Ala. 253,51 So.2d 244 |
Parties | RAINER v. MOSELEY. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Cope & Cope, of Union Springs, for appellant.
Moseley & McIlwain, of Union Springs, for appellee.
The appeal in this case is by S. P. Rainer, Jr., one of the defendants, from an interlocutory decree overruling his demurrer to the bill as last amended. The bill is a creditor's bill filed by the appellee Rochelle R. Moseley, on April 5, 1948, against S. P. Rainer, Jr. and J. W. Rainer, as executors of the estate of S. P. Rainer, Sr., deceased, and against them and the other heirs at law of said S. P. Rainer, Sr., individually, for discovery and relief.
The bill alleges that the complainant on July 28, 1931, recovered a judgment against the said S. P. Rainer in the Circuit Court of Bullock County, 'which judgment was duly recorded in the Probate Office of Bullock County, Alabama, on August 22, 1931, that execution was duly issued on said judgment within the time required by law, and return was made by the Sheriff of Bullock County, Alabama, to the court of 'no property found.' That on January 12, 1946, the said judgment was duly revived by a scire facias proceeding in the Circuit Court of Bullock County, Alabama, a copy of the order or decree reviving said judgment being attached hereto, as Complainant's Exhibit B and by reference made a part hereof.
'That the said S. P. Rainer, Sr., the judgment debtor, died on to-wit: August 13, 1933, a resident of Bullock County, Alabama, and two of his sons, namely: S. P. Rainer, Jr., and J. W. Rainer were duly appointed and qualified as Executors of his estate, * * *; that notice of Complainant's said judgment and claim against the estate of S. P. Rainer, Sr., deceased, was duly given and filed within the time required by law, and Complainant avers that said judgment and claim with interest and costs has not been paid and there has never been a final settlement of said estate, and said Executors have never been discharged.
'Complainant avers that at the time of said execution and the return of the Sheriff of 'No property found', there were 160 acres of land, described as follows, to-wit: (describing said land) which belonged to said S. P. Rainer, Sr., and was not encumbered, and which was subject to the lien of said judgment; that the said above described land was not sold or disposed of by the said S. P. Rainer, Sr., during his lifetime, and upon his death became the property of his heirs at law, subject to the lien of said judgment and claim of complainant.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Carr v. Cowan, 6 Div. 588
...facias of such a judgment against the heirs at law of a deceased judgment debtor or against his administrator ad litem. Rainer v. Moseley, 255 Ala. 253, 51 So.2d 244; Enslen v. Wheeler, 98 Ala. 200, 13 So. 473; May v. Parham, 68 Ala. The original theory was that a judgment rendered against ......