From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brunnier v. Hill

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jun 30, 1920
85 So. 691 (Ala. 1920)

Opinion

1 Div. 134.

June 17, 1920. Rehearing Denied June 30, 1920.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Mobile County; Joel W. Goldsby, Judge.

Frederick G. Bromberg, of Mobile, for appellant.

The fraud complained of was practiced in the very act of obtaining judgment against her and entitled her to relief. 189 Ala. 258, 65 So. 993; 170 Ala. 367, 54 So. 172. By permitting decree pro confesso, and failing to interpose demurrers, respondent waived the provisions of rule 14. 10 Ala. 305; 6 Ala. 299; 11 Ala. 668.

No counsel marked for appellee.


Bill in equity for relief against a judgment at law. The agreement of counsel set up was not in writing, and was within the influence of circuit court rule 14, Code 1907, p. 1520. Collier v. Falk, 66 Ala. 223; Norman v. Burns, 67 Ala. 248; Hendley v. Chabert, 189 Ala. 258, 267, 65 So. 993; Evans v. Wilhite, 176 Ala. 287, 58 So. 262.

The decree of the circuit court is affirmed. Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and McCLELLAN and SOMERVILLE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Brunnier v. Hill

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jun 30, 1920
85 So. 691 (Ala. 1920)
Case details for

Brunnier v. Hill

Case Details

Full title:BRUNNIER v. HILL et al

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Jun 30, 1920

Citations

85 So. 691 (Ala. 1920)
85 So. 691

Citing Cases

Standard Chemical Co. v. Barbaree

The agreement alleged infringes Supreme Court Rule 22 and Circuit Court Rule 14, and is void and…

Kirkland v. C. D. Franke Co.

The court properly sustained the demurrers to the petition. 204 Ala. 559, 86 So. 549; 202 Ala. 330, 80 So.…