Case law

Wray v. State

15 Ala. App. 81 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 1916

BROWN, J. — The act approved February 8, 1915, makes it unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to receive or accept for delivery of, or to possess more than a specified quantity of, intoxicating liquors at any one … —Acts 1915, p. 44; Southern Express Co. v. Whittle, 194 Ala. 406 , 69 South. 652 , L. R. A. 1916C, 278.

Johnson v. State Ex Rel. Jones

16 Ala. App. 4 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 1917

BROWN, P. J. [1] The conversation between Ollie Johnson, the father of the defendant, and the prosecutrix is not shown to have been in the presence of the defendant. … Rowlan v. State, 14 Ala. App. 17 , 70 South. 953 ; Martin v.

Cleveland v. State

19 Ala. App. 260 · Alabama Court of Appeals · May 8, 1923

So far as this insistence is concerned, it is- identical with the questions raised in the ease of John Brown *261 v. State (Ala. … A charge of similar import was approved in the case of Wharton v. State, 73 Ala. 367 , but the charge here contains the term “to the seclusion of every other reasonable hypothesis,” etc.

Turner v. State

32 Ala. App. 465 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 1946

Ex parte Nettles, 58 Ala. 268 ; Ex parte Brown, 65 Ala. 446 ; Ex parte Sloane, 95 Ala. 22 , 11 So. 14 ; Earnest v. State, 21 Ala.App. 534 , 109 So. 613 .

Lee v. Cunningham

27 Ala. App. 461 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 1937

See First National Bank of Scottsboro v. Jackson County 227 Ala. 448 , 150 So. 690 . … We are persuaded that the situation presented is not that governed by the law that “a statute of limitations, to be available, must be pleaded” (See Russell v.

Chaney v. State

29 Ala. App. 225 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Feb 13, 1940

This charge does state a correct principle of law, as was ably discussed by Justice Brown in Walker v.

Wilson v. State

31 Ala. App. 560 · Alabama Court of Appeals · May 16, 1944

Justice Brown in the Harrison case, above. Other cases are: Martin v. State, 2 Ala. App. 175 , 56 So. 64 ; Wilson v. State, 73 Ala. 527 ; Sanders v. State, 148 Ala. 603 , 41 So. 466 ; Spinks v. State, 14 Ala. … App. 75 , 71 So. 623 ; Vowell v. State, 20 Ala. App. 322 , 101 So. 780 ; Bedingfield v. State, 24 Ala. App. 398 , 135 So. 656 ; Richardson v. State, 28 Ala. App. 432 , 186 So. 574 ; Kennamer v. State, 28 Ala.

Ingles v. State

13 Ala. App. 184 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Apr 8, 1915

BROWN, J. Tbe appellant was indicted for an of-fence denounced by section 6230 of tbe Code.. … —Downey v.

Morgan Plan Co. v. Beverly

35 Ala. App. 563 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 9, 1951

Morgan boarded with her mother. Mrs. Andrews testified that she saw Mr. Morgan at his 'boarding place “most every Sunday.” If the testimony of these witnesses is to be accepted as true, Mr. … International Harvester Co. v. Donaldson, 26 Ala.App. 502 , 162 So. 566, 569 .

Collins v. State

14 Ala. App. 54 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 1916

BROWN, J.— (1, 2) The indictment describes the property taken from the person of the state’s witness, Catringris, as “one $10 bill of the paper currency of the United States of America, and one $5 bill of the paper currency … —Turner v. State, 124 Ala. 59 , 27 South. 272 ; Thomas v. State, 117 Ala. 84 , 23 South. 659 ; Gady v. State, 83 Ala. 53 , 3 South. 429 ; Duvall v. State, 63 Ala. 12 ; Grant v. State, 55 Ala. 201 ; Montgomery v.

Southern Railway Co. v. Jarvis

11 Ala. App. 635 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 1914

Co. v. Martin, 117 Ala. 382 , 23 South. 231 ] So. Ry. Co. v. Bunt, 131 Ala. 595 , 32 South. 507 ; Birmingham Railway, Light & Power Co. v. Brown, 150 Ala. 327 , 43 South. 342 ; Birmingham Railway, Light & Power Co. v. … Co. v. Freeman, 134 Ala. 354 , 32 South. 778 ; L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Mitchell, 134 Ala. 261 , 32 South. 735 ; B. R. L. & P. Co. v. Brown, 150 Ala. 327 , 43 South. 342 ; Neyman v. A. G. S. R. R.

McCurdy v. State

41 Ala. App. 546 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 1962

Rungan v. State, 25 Ala.App. 287 , 145 So. 171 ; Miller v. State, 39 Ala.App. 584 , 105 So.2d 711 . … He saw them on the floor board of the car by the aid of his flashlight from the opposite side of the automobile. The pieces of glass introduced as state’s exhibit one have been examined -by us.

Cornelius v. Lowery

14 Ala. App. 454 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 1915

BROWN, J. In Gunter v. … Co. v. Burleson, 4 Ala. App. 384 , 59 South. 230 . The case of Gunter v.

Western Union Telegraph Company v. Morrison.

15 Ala. App. 532 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 9, 1917

Co. v. Krichbaum, 132 Ala. 535 , 31 South. 607 . … .”— Blount v. W. U. T. Co., supra; W. U. T. Co. v. Rowell, 153 Ala. 295 , 45 South. 73 .

James v. State

15 Ala. App. 89 · Alabama Court of Appeals · May 30, 1916

BROWN, J. … Bailey, 110 Ala. 310 , 20 South. 359 ; Jones v. Black, 48 Ala. 540 ; State, ex rel. Perkins v. Montgomery Light Co., 102 Ala. 594 , 15 South. 347 ; Bozeman v. State, 7 Ala. App. 151 , 61 South. 604 .

Askew v. State

18 Ala. App. 345 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 10, 1922

Holland v. State, 11 Ala. App. 134 , 66 South. 126 ; Ex parte Holland, 191 Ala. 662 , 66 South. 1008 ; Kirk v. State, 13 Ala. App. 316 , 69 South. 350 ; Brown v. State, 15 Ala. App. 611 , 74 South. 733 . … Smith v. State, 16 Ala. App. 546 , 79 South. 802 . We find no error in the record, and the judgment of conviction is affirmed. Affirmed.

Buckhanon v. State

12 Ala. App. 36 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Feb 2, 1915

BROWN, J. … —McClain v. State, supra; Watkins v. State, 133 Ala. 88 , 32 South. 627 ; Wildman, v. State, 139 Ala. 125 , 35 South. 995 ; Smith v. State, 182 Ala. 38 , 62 South. 184 .

Kreutner v. State

16 Ala. App. 553 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Apr 9, 1918

App. 180 , 65 So. 683 ; s. c., 188 Ala. 1 , 66 So. 148 ; Frazier v. State, 11 Ala. App. 286 , 66 So. 879 ; Brown v. State, ante, p. 29, 75 So. 174 ; s. c. reviewed by Supreme Court, 200 Ala. 607 , 76 So. 995 ; Baader v. … City of Birmingham v. Southern Express Co., 164 Ala. 529 , 51 So. 159 ; Pepper v. Horn et al., 197 Ala. 395 , 73 So. 46 ; Board of Revenue v. Johnson (Sup.) 76 So. 859 ; 1 Moss v. State, supra; Parker v.

Ingram v. State

21 Ala. App. 182 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 1925

But for the decisions, the writer would agree with the views of the minority as expressed in Chisolm v. State, 204 Ala. 69 , 85 So. 462 . The evidence offered was admissible. Ex parte Williams (Ala. … Sup.) 104 So. 44 ; 1 Chisolm v. State, supra; Brown v. Welch, 209 Ala. 518 , 96 So. 610 . The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded. Reversed and remanded. 1 213 Ala. 145 .

Thompson v. Manufacturers' Finance Acceptance Corp.

25 Ala. App. 70 · Alabama Court of Appeals · Jan 19, 1932

v. … Particular attention is directed to the following authorities: Eason v. State, 22 Ala. App. 424 , 116 So. 409 ; Finney v. Sullivan, 22 Ala. App. 130 , 113 So. 472 ; Sovereign Camp, W. O. W. v.