Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

65 Ala. 523

Armstrong v. Harper

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 15, 1880

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1880-12-15

Tried before the Hon. F. S. Ferguson, an attorney of the court, selected by the parties on account of the incompetency from interest of the presiding judge. Held: claimed, or to be set up, or which may hereafter be set up, held or claimed, by or on behalf of the said Mrs. A. L. Gayle, her heirs, executors,” &c., then the bond to be void.

Decided 1880-12-15

BBICKELL, 0. J.

¶1— The entry of record, of the payment made by Harper, on the decree rendered by the Chancery Court in favor of Mrs. Gayle against him and Armstrong, was made at a term subsequent to the rendition of the final decree in the cause. As we understand the expression fined decree, found in the bill of exceptions, it was the decree der termining all the rights, and adjusting all the equities of the parties, leaving nothing further to be done by the court, and terminating the suit. When such a decree is rendered, the parties are discharged from further attendance upon the court. If other proceedings from any cause become necessary, it results, that of them the party to be affected must have notice : and if they are taken without notice to him, they are not binding upon, or evidence against him. Hence, it has several times been decided by this court, that when a motion is made to enter satisfaction of a judgment, notice •to the plaintiff is indispensable. — 2 Brick. Dig. 154,. § 829. This entry of satisfaction having been made when Armstrong was not before the Court of Chancery, — when he was not under the duty of attending — it is not evidence against him, of the facts recited in it. He was neither a party nor *526privy to it; and tbe recitals of records are evidence only against the parties or privies to them.

¶2The Circuit Court erred in its several rulings, and the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

/65/ala/523 · .json · Public domain