Legal Opinion

Augusta Friedman's Shop, Inc. v. Yeates

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 28, 1927No. 6 Div. 770PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAnderson, C. J.

Of course, the injury complained of must have been inflicted by an agent or servant of the defendant while acting within the line and scope of the employment or as so held out by it. The evidence tends to establish the fact that the plaintiff’s scalp was injured through the negligence of an employee of the Augusta Friedman Beauty Salon, and the question arises, Was- the appellant, the Augusta Friedman Shop, Inc., the owner in whole or in part in the Augusta Friedman Beauty Salon, or did the former hold itself out as the owner or proprietor of the latter? It is a well-established rule of law…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hannon v. . Siegel-Cooper Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1901
  2. Gibson v. Snow Hardware Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1891
  3. Southern Ry. Co. v. BeatySupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  4. Cain Lumber Co. v. Standard Dry Kiln Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  5. Ala. Fertilizer Co. v. Reynolds & LeeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Co. v. GentrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
  2. Maloney Tank Mfg. Co. v. Mid-Continent Petroleum Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1931
  3. Hedlund v. Sutter Medical Service Co.California Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Rhone v. Try Me Cab Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1933
  5. Union Oil Company of California v. CraneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1972

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API