Thompson v. Damskibsaktieselskabet Habil
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. William S. Anderson. This ivas an.action brought, by the appellee, a corporation, against the appellants, to recover damages for the alleged breach of a contract. Under the opinion on the present appeal, it is unnecessary to set out the facts of the case in detail. There were verdict and judgment for the defendant. Thereafter the plaintiff made a motion for a new trial, which ivas granted.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. William S. Anderson. This ivas an.action brought, by the appellee, a corporation, against the appellants, to recover damages for the alleged breach of a contract. Under the opinion on the present appeal, it is unnecessary to set out the facts of the case in detail. There were verdict and judgment for the defendant. Thereafter the plaintiff made a motion for a new trial, which ivas granted. To this ruling the defendant duly excepted. From the judgment granting tlie new trial the. defendants appeal, and assign the rendition thereof…
1Opinion of the CourtTyson, J.
This appeal is prosecuted from an order granting a motion for a now trial: The record shows that the. cause was tric'd at a regular term of the court, which convened on the 21st day of April, 1902, the same being the fourth Monday after the fourth Monday in March; being the date fixed by the statute for the hold-' ing of said court. — § 911 of Code. The statute also prescribes and limits the term to ten weeks. This period of time expired on the. 28th day of June, 1902, the day on which the motion appealed from was heard and determined. In other.words, the order granting the new trial was…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dantzler & Sons v. Swift Creek Mill Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1900
- Massillon Engine & Thresher Co. v. Arnold & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1901
3Cited by1 opinion
- Strickland v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907