January Term, 1833
A dispute over a twenty-five-dollar promissory note led the Alabama Supreme Court to examine trial evidence, partnership admissions, and alleged agency. The judgment was reversed and the case remanded.
FILED WITH
Hutchins sued Childress and Baker as partners in Greene County. Their defense involved a claimed sale and resale of goods in payment of this debt and thirty-nine other debts. The opinion by Judge Saffold discusses reopening evidence and whether one defendant’s statements could be used for or against the partnership. The Court found no error in reopening the evidence, but reversed on evidentiary grounds. This case immediately follows Ryder v. Innerarity in the same volume; Condry v. Henley & Murphey is also preserved in this collection.
All 11 source pages transcribed and visually checked. Main case text, headnotes, counsel attribution, opinion and conclusion included. The uncertain opening abbreviation in the small page 43 marginal citation is explicitly marked; consult the Image PDF. Running headers omitted and paragraph layout reflowed in the Text PDF.
Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.2 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓Unchanged owner-supplied photograph, preserved at the resolution received through Personal Squawk. Includes the complete target page and partial adjacent-page surroundings.
JPEG image · 0.1 MB · 1 photographed page
Download ↓All eleven original photographs assembled in printed-page order, without abridgment. Added citation and sequence labels. Includes source margins and partial adjoining pages. No newly verified OCR transcription.
PDF · 2.3 MB · 11 pages
Download ↓All 11 source pages transcribed and visually checked. Main case text, headnotes, counsel attribution, opinion and conclusion included. The uncertain opening abbreviation in the small page 43 marginal citation is explicitly marked; consult the Image PDF. Running headers omitted and paragraph layout reflowed in the Text PDF.
PDF · 0.0 MB · 11 pages
Download ↓Hutchins v. Childress & Baker, 4 Stewart & Porter 34-44 (Supreme Court of Alabama, January Term 1833).
Historical judicial report from 1833. Source photographs supplied by the collection owner for public archival access.
Technical archive record ↓