Williams v. Hurley

• Decision Date: 18 December 1902
• Citation: 135 Ala. 319,33 So. 159
• Parties: WILLIAMS ET AL. v. HURLEY ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

33 So. 159

135 Ala. 319

WILLIAMS ET AL. v. HURLEY ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

December 18, 1902

Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson county; A. A. Coleman, Judge.

Action by Hurley & Blackmon against Williams & Brown. From a judgment against the individual members of defendant partnership, they appeal. Reversed.

B. M Allen, for appellants.

Sterling A. Wood, for respondents.

McCLELLAN C.J.

The following is the complaint in this case: "Hurley and Blackmon, a firm composed of Chas. D. Hurley and Benjamin E Blackmon, Plaintiffs, v. Williams and Brown, a firm composed of Dote M. Williams and Morgan L. Brown, Defendants. The plaintiff claims of the defendant the sum of seventy and 35/100 dollars due by contract for work and labor made by defendant on, to wit, the 1st day of October, 1901, and payable on, to wit, the 2d day of October, 1901, with interest." This complaint was filed in a justice's court, where there was a trial resulting in a "judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the sum of $50.30 and costs of suit." From this judgment the defendant, the firm of Williams & Brown, took an appeal to the circuit court. The only complaint filed in that court was that copied above, which was sent up by the justice. In the circuit court on January 8, 1902, the following judgment was entered: "Hurley and Blackmon, a firm composed of Chas D. Hurley and Benjamin E. Blackmon, v. Williams and Brown, a firm composed of Dote M. Williams and Morgan L. Brown. On this the 8th day of January, 1902, came the plaintiffs by their attorney; and the defendants, being solemnly called came not, but made default. And no pleas being filed, it is therefore considered and adjudged by the court that the plaintiff ought to recover; but, not being advised as to the just amount of damages sustained, the court proceeds to hear the evidence without the intervention of a jury, according to law, and after hearing the same, and argument of counsel rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff for seventy and 35/100 dollars. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the court that the plaintiffs have and recover of the defendants, and J. J. Odom and A. J. Hall, sureties on said appeal bond, the said sum of seventy and 35/100 dollars so assessed as aforesaid, together with all the costs in this behalf expended, for which execution may issue. And against this judgment and the execution to be issued thereon there is...