defendant relies bar in Alabama

1964Aultman and Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 : “ ‘ * * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): “It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail himself of any ma

1958Aultman & Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 , 31, this court said: “* * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): ‘It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail h

1964Aultman and Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 : “ ‘ * * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): “It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail himself of any ma

1958Aultman & Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 , 31, this court said: “* * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): ‘It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail h

1964Aultman and Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 : “ ‘ * * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): “It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail himself of any ma

1958Aultman & Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 , 31, this court said: “* * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): ‘It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail h

1964Aultman and Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 : “ ‘ * * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): “It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail himself of any ma

1958Aultman & Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 , 31, this court said: “* * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): ‘It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail h

1964Aultman and Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 : “ ‘ * * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): “It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail himself of any ma

1958Aultman & Co., 125 Ala. 372 , 28 So. 30 , 31, this court said: “* * * As said by Mr. Daniel, (1 Dan.Ch.Pl. & Pr., 711, 713): ‘It is of great importance to the pleader, in preparing an answer, to bear in mind that besides answering the plaintiff’s case as made by the bill, he should state to the court upon the answer all the circumstances of which the defendant intends to avail himself by way of defense; for a defendant ought to apprise the plaintiff by his answer of the nature of the case he intends to set up, and that, too, in a clear, unambiguous manner; and, in strictness, he cannot avail h

1939Aultman & Co., 125 Ala. 372, 376 , 28 So. 30 , 31; Freeman v. Stewart, 119 Ala. 158 , 24 So. 31 ; Noble v. Gilliam, 136 Ala. 618, 623 , 33 So. 861 ; Robinson v. Moseley, 93 Ala. 70 , 9 So. 372 ; Smith v. M.

1922The respondents in order to be accorded the advantage of evidence offered in support of the bona fides of the transaction, should have alleged in their answers the facts showing good faith, the actual payment of an adequate consideration, how, when and in what the consideration was paid. * * * The answer must put in issue all the facts on which the defendant relies in bar of the relief sought by the bill, and evidence cannot be adduced of facts outside of these issues.” Gamble v. Aultman, 125 Ala. 372, 376 , 28 South. 30 , 31; Freeman v. Stewart, 119 Ala. 158, 167 , 24 South. 31 ; Noble v. Gil

1962The answer must put in issue all the facts on which the defendant relies in bar of the relief sought by the bill, and evidence cannot be adduced of facts outside of these issues.’ [Citing cases] * * * ” Appellees rely, as did the trial court, on what was said in Des Portes v. Hall, 238 Ala. 641, 645 , 192 So. 899, 901 .

1962The answer must put in issue all the facts on which the defendant relies in bar of the relief sought by the bill, and evidence cannot be adduced of facts outside of these issues.’ [Citing cases] * * * ” Appellees rely, as did the trial court, on what was said in Des Portes v. Hall, 238 Ala. 641, 645 , 192 So. 899, 901 .

1958A general denial in a mortgage foreclosure action is permissible, and is sufficient to raise triable issues of fact; but affirmative defenses such as payment should be especially pleaded. 59 C.J.S., Mortgages § 646, p. 1141, citing O’Rear v. Federal Land Bank of New Orleans, 227 Ala. 89 , 149 So. 96 , and Willingham v. Lankford, 257 Ala. 595 , 60 So.2d 387 .

1958A general denial in a mortgage foreclosure action is permissible, and is sufficient to raise triable issues of fact; but affirmative defenses such as payment should be especially pleaded. 59 C.J.S., Mortgages § 646, p. 1141, citing O’Rear v. Federal Land Bank of New Orleans, 227 Ala. 89 , 149 So. 96 , and Willingham v. Lankford, 257 Ala. 595 , 60 So.2d 387 .

1958Umphrey v. Barfield, 238 Ala. 11 , 189 So. 64 .

1958Umphrey v. Barfield, 238 Ala. 11 , 189 So. 64 .

1958Atwood v. Benson, 215 Ala. 72 , 109 So. 361 ; 15 Ala. Dig., Payment, The answer must put in issue all the facts on which the defendant relies in bar of the relief sought by the bill and evidence of facts outside of these issues cannot be adduced.

1958Atwood v. Benson, 215 Ala. 72 , 109 So. 361 ; 15 Ala. Dig., Payment, The answer must put in issue all the facts on which the defendant relies in bar of the relief sought by the bill and evidence of facts outside of these issues cannot be adduced.

1958A general denial in a mortgage foreclosure action is permissible, and is sufficient to raise triable issues of fact; but affirmative defenses such as payment should be especially pleaded. 59 C.J.S., Mortgages § 646, p. 1141, citing O’Rear v. Federal Land Bank of New Orleans, 227 Ala. 89 , 149 So. 96 , and Willingham v. Lankford, 257 Ala. 595 , 60 So.2d 387 .

1958A general denial in a mortgage foreclosure action is permissible, and is sufficient to raise triable issues of fact; but affirmative defenses such as payment should be especially pleaded. 59 C.J.S., Mortgages § 646, p. 1141, citing O’Rear v. Federal Land Bank of New Orleans, 227 Ala. 89 , 149 So. 96 , and Willingham v. Lankford, 257 Ala. 595 , 60 So.2d 387 .