J. R. Raible Co. v. City Bank & Trust Co.
Alabama Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.
Under section 9513 of the Code of 1923, amendments to the pleadings were properly allowed. Rulings of the court relating thereto were without error.
The issues as formed under the plead ings present every question involving the rights of the defendant. Therefore, if there is technical, error in any of the rulings of the court on the pleading, such error is without injury to defendant’s rights.
The rule applicable to special findings of fact by a judge in a trial without a jury under section 9501 of the Code of 1923, was declared to be one way in Germania Ins. Co. v. Kitchens, 201 Ala. 674, 79…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hackett v. CashSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Northside Railway Co. v. WorthingtonTexas Supreme Court · 1895
- Thomas v. Brownville, Fort Kearney, & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Haupt v. VintWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1911
- Jones v. HinesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Springer v. SullivanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- J. R. Raible Co. v. City Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Bob Bell Realty Co. v. Jones Valley Land Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Robert G. Lassiter & Co. v. NixonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928