Legal Opinion

Moncrief v. Wilkinson

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 15, 1890PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Action by Purchaser for Fraud and Deceit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jefferson. Tried before the Hon. James B. Head.

1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.

— This is an action sounding in damages for deceit in the sale of a mule by Moncrief to Wilkinson. It *374was begun in a justice’s court, where judgment was rendered for plaintiff, from which defendant appealed. Trial in the Circuit Court was had without jury, and exception reserved to the conclusion of the judge on the facts, and subsequent judgment in favor of the plain'iff. The present appeal brings under review this conclusion and judgment of the court upon the evidence. — Acts 1888-9, p. 800.

'We are reasonably satisfied that the defendant, in response to inquiries as to the soundness of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Barnett v. StantonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
  2. Tabor v. PetersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
  3. Sledge v. ScottSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
  4. Whitworth v. ThomasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kilby Locomotive & Mach. Works v. Lacey & SonAlabama Court of Appeals · 1915
  2. Glover v. PhillipsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API