Case law

Steele By-Products Co. v. McGee Cowart

19 Ala. App. 29 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 1922

Duffey v. Southern Mfg. Co. (Ala. Sup.) 92 South. 545 ; 1 Moss v. King, 186 Ala. 475 , 65 South. 180 ; Terrell v. Nelson, 177 Ala. 596 , 58 South. 989 . … Jackson v. Vaughn, 204 Ala. 543 , 86 South. 469 ; Best Park & Am. Co. v. Rollins, 192 Ala. 534 , 68 South. 417 , Ann. Cas. 1917D, 929; Vance v. Morgan, 198 Ala. 149 , 73 South. 406 ; Clinton Mining Co. v.

Tennessee Valley Sand & Gravel Co. v. Pilling

35 Ala. App. 237 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Mar 7, 1950

Kelley v. State, 32 Ala.App. 408 , 26 So.2d 633 ; Malone v. … Garrett v. State, 248 Ala. 612 , 29 So.2d 8 ; Brown v. State, 33 Ala.App. 152 , 31 So.2d 652 ; Henderson v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co., 190 Ala. 126 , 67 So. 414 .

Chavers v. State

41 Ala. App. 585 · Alabama Court of Appeals · May 15, 1962

Blackwell v. Jennings, 128 Ga. 264 (2), 57 S.E. 484 . “2. … Daugherty v.

Willingham v. State

28 Ala. App. 261 · Alabama Court of Appeals · May 24, 1938

Willingham v. State, 27 Ala.App. 363 , 172 So. 471 . On June 25, 1932, Thomas L. … This witness also testified that the man in' the car had on a blue dress shirt and a brown tweed cap, which had seen lots of use.

Robinson v. State

29 Ala. App. 47 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 1939

In the case of Brown v. … Cadle v. State, 27 Ala.App. 519 , 175 So. 327 ; Ratliff v. State, 19 Ala.App. 505 , 98 So. 493 ; Booth v. State, 22 Ala.App. 508 , 117 So. 492 ; Pelham v. State, 23 Ala.App. 359 , 125 So. 688 ; Patterson v.

Kilgore & Son v. Shannon & Co.

6 Ala. App. 537 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Nov 12, 1912

In pleading its office is to state time, place, numbers, or manner, Avhich are not of the essence of the matter in issue, so that they may not be proved strictly as laid. — Brown v. Berry, 47 Ill. 175 ; State v. … . — Williams v. McKissack, 125 Ala. 544 , 27 South. 922 ; Mobile, J. & K. C. R. R. Co. v.

W. B. Davis Hosiery Mill, Inc. v. Wilson

37 Ala. App. 675 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Aug 31, 1954

Brush v. Rountree, 33 Ala.App. 227 , 32 So.2d 244 ; Trammell v. Robinson, 34 Ala.App. 91 , 37 So.2d 142 . … Roberts v. Mays Mills, 184 N.C. 406 , 114 S.E. 530 , 28 A.L.R. 338 ; Robertson v. Wise, 153 S.C. 459 , 151 S.E. 87 .

Clayton v. State

23 Ala. App. 150 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 1929

App. 437 , 97 So. 901 ; Brown v. State, 118 Ala. 111 , 23 So. 81 ; Gregory v. State, 140 Ala. 16 , 37 So. 259 ; Howard v. State, 151 Ala. 22 , 44 So. 95 . Refused charge 34 was held to be good in Stewart v. … Refused charges 42 and 43 are held to be good in Gregg v. State, 106 Ala. 44 , 17 So. 321 , but the Gregg Case is overruled in Brown v. State, 142 Ala. 287 , 38 So. 268 ; Latikos v. State, 17 Ala. App. 592 , 88 So. 45 .

Taylor v. State

43 Ala. App. 185 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Aug 17, 1965

Foy Guin [an attorney at law and], Chairman of the Board of Directors of the First National Bank of Russellville, members of the same church, faith, or order of the said J. … In Cox v.

Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. Mason

10 Ala. App. 263 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 15, 1914

Co. v. Mason, 4 Ala. … Co. v.

Montgomery v. State

26 Ala. App. 334 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 1935

French et al. v. … Haley v. Clark, 26 Ala. 439 ; State ex rel. French et al. v. Stone, County Treasurer, supra; Dorman v. State, 34 Ala. 216 , 230 , 231 ; Alabama Life Ins., etc., Co. v. Boykin, 38 Ala. 510 ; Carleton v.

Shepherd v. Clements

25 Ala. App. 7 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 1931

The case of Browne v. Giger, 221 Ala. 176 , 128 So. 174 , has been consulted. We find nothing in that case to indicate that section 9502 of the Code repeals the Local Practice Act above referred to. … "In Day v. Adcock, 11 Ala.

Kozlowski v. State

32 Ala. App. 453 · Alabama Court of Appeals · May 21, 1946

Warren v. State, ante, p. 273, 25 So.2d 51 . … Ducett v. State, 186 Ala. 34 , 65 So. 351 ; Desilvey v. State, 245 Ala. 163 , 16 So.2d 183 .

Colvin v. State

37 Ala. App. 268 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 1953

Kimbrell v. State, 18 Ala. App. 641 , 94 So. 241 ; Stephenson v. State, 27 Ala.App. 122 , 166 So. 620 ; Campbell v. State, 32 Ala.App. 461 , 27 So.2d 220 ; Graham v. State, 233 Ala. 387 , 171 So. 895 ; Richardson v. … State, 237 Ala. 11 , 186 So. 580 ; Wesson v. State, 238 Ala. 399 , 191 So. 249 ; Key v. State, 240 Ala. 1 , 197 So. 363 .

Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Faust

17 Ala. App. 96 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 1919

BROWN, P. … Co. v.

Citizens Nat. Bank v. Buckheit

14 Ala. App. 511 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 11, 1916

BROWN, J. … Co. v.

Wilkins v. State

29 Ala. App. 349 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Mar 26, 1940

There are many Alabama cases affirming the general doctrine here announced, notably among them being Yarborough v. State, 41 Ala. 405 ; Ross v. State, 62 Ala. 224 ; Curtis v. State, 78 Ala. 12 ; Stanley v. … Brown v. State, 15 Ala.App. 180, 181 , 72 So. 757 , certiorari denied 198 Ala. 689 , 73 So. 999 ; McDonald v. State, 83 Ala. 46 , 3 So. 305 . Note 62 L.R. A., pages 214 et seq.

Livingston v. State

44 Ala. App. 559 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Nov 19, 1968

Hence, since the court pronounced but one sentence of three years in the penitentiary, no question is presented under Lawson v. State, 33 Ala. App. 333 , 33 So.2d 405 , and Wildman v. State, 42 Ala. … On rehearing in Clayton v. State, 21 Ala. App. 288 , 107 So. 724 , the majority opinion reads: "SAMFORD, J.

King Land & Improvement Co. v. Bowen

7 Ala. App. 462 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Feb 4, 1913

. — Singer Co. v. Greenleaf, 100 Ala. 272 , 14 South. 109 ; Lewis Lumber. Co,, v. Camody, 137 Ala. 578 , 35 South. 126 ; Smith v. … Co. v. Brown, 150 Ala. 330 , 43 South. 342 ; Boston, etc., v. Shanty, 107 Mass. 568 ; Ives v. Williams, 50 Mich. 100 , 15 N. W. 33 ; B’ham So. R. R. Co. v.

Golden v. State

39 Ala. App. 361 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 21, 1958

In Watson v. … In McDonald v. State, 241 Ala. 172 , 1 So.2d 658, 660 , the court, per Brown, J., said: “Testimony going to show motive, though motive is not an element of the burden of proof resting on the state, is always admissible.