Winnemore v. Mathews

Decided January 15, 1871

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1871-01-15

Tried before Hon. P. G. Wood. The complaint in this cause (the name of the parties and style of count being here omitted,) was as follows ; • “ The plaintiff claims of the defendant three hundred dollars, due by account on 1st day of January, 1866, for work and labor done and services rendered for the defendant, at her request during the year 1865; also, the further sum of four hundred and six dollars, due by account on the 1st day of January, 1867, for work and labor done…

Relies on Browder v. Gaston

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1871-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 1919

6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

B. F. SAFFOLD, J.

¶1The summons was not signed by the clerk, and the judgment was by default. The summons must be signed by-the clerk, and it is his signature which gives it validity. — -Rev. Code, §§ 2559, 2560; Stone v. Harris, Minor’s Rep. 32; Browder v. Gaston & Wellborn, 30 Ala. 677; Costley v. Driver, present term.

¶2The complaint does not contain a substantial cause of action. By the omission to state who did the work, the plaintiff might recover money to which he had no claim whatever, and another is entitled.

¶3The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.