Gambill v. Schmuck
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City -Court of Birmingham. Tried before the Hon. Charles A. Senn. Thi-s 'was an action for false imprisonment brought by the appellee against the appellant. The averments of the complaint are sufficiently -stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City -Court of Birmingham. Tried before the Hon. Charles A. Senn. Thi-s 'was an action for false imprisonment brought by the appellee against the appellant. The averments of the complaint are sufficiently -stated in the opinion. The defendant pleaded the general issue and the following special pleas: “3. Comes the defendant and for further plea in thi-s behalf says the plaintiff ought not to have and recover any sum in this cause, because he says that he was the license collector of the city of Birmingham, Alabama, at the time alleged.in the complaint and was vested with the…
1Opinion of the Court
McCLELLAN, O. J.
Action by Schmuck against G-ambill. The complaint contains two counts. The first claims damages for that defendant maliciousy and without probable cause therefor arrested and imprisoned the plaintiff, etc. The second count claims damages for that defendant unlawfully arrested and imprisoned plaintiff, etc. Each count alleges that defendant arrested plaintiff on a charge of violating section 323 of the ordinance Code of the city of Birmingham, which makes it unlawful for a person to do a business for which a license is required before paying for and taking out such license. The…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Standard Oil Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Sanders v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- Rhodes v. McWilsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
- Deason v. GraySupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
- Deason v. GraySupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.