When an execution for money from any court has been issued against a defendant and is not satisfied, the plaintiff, or the person for whose benefit such execution is sued out, may file a complaint against such defendant to compel the discovery of any property belonging to him, or held in trust for him, and to prevent the transfer, payment or delivery thereof to such defendant, except when the trust has been created by, or proceeded from, some other person than the defendant himself; and the court may bring any other party before it and adjudge such property, or the interest of the defendant therein, to the satisfaction of the sum due the plaintiff.
(Code 1852, §2987; Code 1867, §3442; Code 1876, §3882; Code 1886, §3540; Code 1896, §814; Code 1907, §3735; Code 1923, §7338; Code 1940, T. 7, §893.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1995–2024 · leading case:
Baker v. Bennett, 660 So. 2d 980 (Ala. 1995).
Baker v. Bennett, 660 So. 2d 980 (Ala. 1995).
“The Bennetts then filed an equitable proceeding pursuant to § 6-6-180 et seq., Ala. Code 1975, seeking discovery of assets and an order directing Baker to transfer property to satisfy the judgment.”
Richardson v. Chambless, 266 So. 3d 684 (Ala. 2018).
“Richardson also asserted against Ben and Rosemarie a conspiracy-to-commit-fraud claim arising from the transfer and, pursuant to § 6-6-180, Ala. Code 1975, sought to compel Ben and Rosemarie "to produce an itemized list .”
Anatharaju v. Gastrointestinal Specialists, P.C. (N.D. Ala. 2022).
· cites it 5× “Count One of the Complaint Satisfies the 20-Year Statute of Limitations Set Forth in Alabama Code § 6-2-32 Count One of the Complaint presents a Bill to Enforce Creditor’s Judgment Pursuant to Alabama Code § 6-6-180 and to Pierce the Corporate Veil of GIS.”
Richardson v. Chambless, 266 So. 3d 684 (Ala. 2018).
“Richardson also asserted against Ben and Rosemarie a conspiracy-to-commit-fraud claim arising from the transfer and, pursuant to § 6-6-180, Ala. Code 1975, sought to compel Ben and Rosemarie "to produce an itemized list .”
Brown v. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, LLC (M.D. Ala. 2024).
· cites it 2× “The creditor’s bill here “obligated Morgan Stanley to pay over a sum of money equal to the total amount of funds Morgan Stanley held in the name of the judgment debtors in the Circuit Court of Tallapoosa County, Alabama.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.