Emerson-Brantingham Implement Co. v. Arrington
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion
On Rehearing.
SOMERVILLE, J.
We are satisfied of the correctness of our conclusion that defendant’s plea 8 is defective in its omission of any allegation showing that when plaintiff repossessed itself of a part of the goods, as alleged, the other goods were still in defendant’s possession, and subject to repossession by plaintiff. The plea exhibits the contract of purchase, showing that the goods were purchased for resale .to defendant’s customers, and that they would be thus resold in the ordinary course of business. It will not be presumed, in favor of the pleader, that any part of these…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mauldin v. Branch Bank at MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
- Grady v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1856
- Adler v. PinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
- Myatts & Moore v. BellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1867
- Bowdoin v. Alabama Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1918
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.