Legal Opinion · Dissent

George Dedmon v. Falls Products Incorporated

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided March 15, 1962No. 19039Published

1DissentRiyes, Circuit Judge

If Title 7, Section 34, 1940 Code of Alabama were construed and applied literally, this action would not be barred by the one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions prescribed by Title 7, Section 26. The early Alabama cases applied the statute exactly as written. For example, in Wright v. Strauss, Inc., 73 Ala. 227, it was said:

“The saving of the statute is confined in its terms to the personal absence from the State of the party sued or liable to suit. Code of 1876, § 3234. In this respect it differs from the statutes of some of the other States, the savings of which do not…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Wuchter v. PizzuttiSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  2. Ray v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  3. Peters v. Tuell Dairy Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  4. Denver-Chicago Trucking Co. v. LindemanDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1947
  5. Harwell v. SteelSupreme Court of Alabama · 1850

2 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