Shannon v. McClung

Suit upon common counts. The defense rested upon the insistence that the litigation arose out of a transaction commonly known as “cc^ton futures,” condemned by the statute in this state, and that therefore the contract was void and unenforceable. Acts 1915, p. 913; Levy, etc., v. Jones, 208 Ala. 104, 93 South. 733; U. S. Cotton Futures Act, 38 Stat. p. 693; 39 Stat. 476; U. S. Comp. St. 1916, vol. 6, p. 7291.

The cause was tried before the court without a jury, resulting in a judgment for defendant, from which plaintiff has prosecuted this appeal.

No prejudicial error resulted from the action…