Herzfeld Lumber Co. v. Langley
Alabama Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
’ SAMFORD, J.
This action is grounded on two contracts for the salé of lumber; counts 1, 2, 3, and 4, claiming under the common counts for the entire purchase price of one carload shipped on defendants’ order to Chattanooga, Tenn., and counts 5 and 6 claiming for a balance due on the purchase price of a carload shipped on defendants’ order to Buffalo, N. Y. For convenience in dealing with the assignments of error, we will follow the order as outlined in appellants’ brief. No brief has come to the hands of the court for appellees.
The Buffalo car was shipped under a written order, dated May 22,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Humes v. O'Bryan & WashingtonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Watt's Ex'rs. v. SheppardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
- Drake v. GoreeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
- Alford v. CreaghAlabama Court of Appeals · 1913
- Cotton v. CottonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bailey v. City of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1964
- Leigh v. CorneliusCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941