Ewart-Brewer Motor Co. v. Cunningham
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtSomerville, J.
It is thoroughly well settled under our present statute (section 8597, Code 1923; Gen. Acts 1915, pp. 939, 940) that, when the plaintiff has indorsed upon his summons and complaint a demand for trial by jury, he cannot thereafter withdraw his demand or waive trial by jury without the consent of the defendant, and that this applies to the ascertainment of damages on a writ of inquiry after a judgment by default. Ex parte Florida Nursery & Trading Co., 201 Ala. 97, 77 So. 391; Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Bannister, 201 Ala. 681, 79 So. 253; Prudential Casualty Co. v. Kerr, 202 Ala. 259, 80 So. 97.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Prudential Casualty Co. v. KerrSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
- Florida Nursery & Trading Co. v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Ex Parte CunninghamAlabama Court of Appeals · 1924
- Knight v. Farrell & ReynoldsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Street v. ShaddixSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ewart v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- King v. HoltamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929