Legal Opinion

Gilbreath v. Bain

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 30, 1924No. 8 Div. 685PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.

The only question presented and argued by counsel for appellant on this appeal relates to the action of the trial court in overruling defendant’s motion for a new trial, based upon the ground of newly discovered evidence. One of the prerequisites to a favorable consideration of such motion upon this ground is that it be made to appear -due diligence had been unavailingly used by the movant prior to the trial. McLeod v. Shelly Mfg. Co., 108 Ala. 81, 19 So. 326; Fries v. Acme White Lead, etc., Wks., 201 Ala. 613, 79 So. 45; Thomas v. Johnson, 208 Ala. 701, 94 So. 922.

There is no pretense of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fries v. Acme White Lead & Color WorksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
  2. McLeod v. Shelly Manufacturing & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  3. De Soto Coal, Mining & Development Co. v. HillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
  4. Thomas v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Mutual Building & Loan Ass'n v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  2. Shaw v. KnightSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  3. Birmingham Electric Co. v. LinnAlabama Court of Appeals · 1948
  4. London Lancashire Ins. Co. v. McWilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  5. Southside Bank v. Birmingham TruthSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930

1 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