History
  • No items yet
midpage
Lackey v. Thomas
184 So. 264
| Ala. | 1938
|
Check Treatment

The opinion of the Court of Appeals states that:

"The value of the machinery at the time it was in the possession of Watford and Moorer was immaterial, and therefore the trial court committed error."

This statement relates to testimony going to show the value at the time the machinery was repossessed by the plaintiff Lackey under the mortgage note given by Watford and Moorer payable to the plaintiff, evidencing their indebtedness to him.

In view of the conflict in the evidence, as to whether the mortgage note was taken and accepted by Lackey in payment and discharge of defendant's note, now in suit, testimony as to the value of the property at the time of the execution of the note might shed light on the conflicting issue of fact, but testimony at the later date, after default by Watford and Moorer, shed no light on the question at issue. George D. Witt Shoe Co. v. Mills, 224 Ala. 500, 140 So. 578; Smith v. State,13 Ala. App. 411, 69 So. 406.

The writ of certiorari was properly denied.

Rehearing overruled.

ANDERSON, C. J., and THOMAS and KNIGHT, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Lackey v. Thomas
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Oct 27, 1938
Citation: 184 So. 264
Docket Number: 8 Div. 941.
Court Abbreviation: Ala.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.