Legal Opinion

Crandall v. City of Birmingham

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 2, 1983No. 82-867PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Crandall, the plaintiff below, appeals from the trial court's order dismissing his claim for damages for assault and battery and negligence against the City of Birmingham. The City's motion to dismiss, which was treated as a motion for summary judgment, was granted on the grounds that Crandall failed to file a notice of claim with the city clerk within the ninety-day period prescribed by Title 62, § 659, of the Alabama Code of 1940 (Recompiled 1958), as preserved by § 1-1-10 of the 1975 Code. It is undisputed that Crandall filed the notice more than ninety days, but less than six months,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. Kotch v. Board of River Port Pilot Comm'rs for Port of New OrleansSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  3. Holt Civic Club v. City of TuscaloosaSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Peddycoart v. City of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1978
  5. Jefferson County v. BraswellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1981

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Jane Doe v. New London Community School DistrictSupreme Court of Iowa · 2014
  2. Phalen v. BIRMINGHAM RACING COM'NSupreme Court of Alabama · 1985
  3. Silva v. City and County of HonoluluHawaii Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Ex Parte RandleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1987
  5. Town of Brilliant v. City of WinfieldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1999

9 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