Legal Opinion

Southern Ry. Co. v. Curry

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided February 22, 1940No. 3 Div. 272PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BROWN, Justice.

The submission was on bill and answer, oath to the answer being waived by footnote to the bill. The answer, therefore, is not evidence, but mere pleading, and to entitle the complainant to relief the averments of the bill must be sufficient to give it equity, and such averments must be admitted by the answer. Code 1923, § 6548; Marks v. Cowles et al., 61 Ala. 299, 309; Winter v. City of Montgomery, 83 Ala. 589, 3 So. 235; Reese v. Barker, 85 Ala. 474, 5 So. 305.

The answer admits all the averments of the bill, except paragraph 5, which is a mere conclusion of the pleader.

Section…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Seals v. Robinson & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1883
  2. Marks v. CowlesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
  3. State Tax Commission v. Commercial Realty Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1938
  4. Majors v. KillianSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
  5. Frederick v. HartleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1918

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Donoghue v. BunkleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
  2. State v. WoodsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1942
  3. Alabama Butane Gas Co. v. Tarrant Land Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1943
  4. Dunbar-Stanley Studios, Inc. v. City of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1968
  5. Scott v. BowmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955

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

Powered by the Exa API