Legal Opinion

Cortner v. Anderson, Clayton & Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 6, 1932No. 8 Div. 369PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.

The general rule is “that in the case of an agreement to do, or refrain from doing any particular act, secured by a penalty, the amount of the penalty is in no sense the measure of compensation; and the plaintiff must show the particular injury of which he complains, and have his damages assessed by a jury.” Jemison v. Governor, 47 Ala. 390, 405, citing Sedgwick on Damages, 396, 410.

While the parties to a contract may sometimes agree on a fixed sum as liquidated damages for the breach of a contract, they cannot by so declaring change the nature of a sum really intended as a penalty, nor is it…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. London v. G. L. Anderson Brass WorksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  2. McFadden & Bro. v. HendersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900
  3. Yeend v. WeeksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
  4. Keeble v. KeebleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
  5. Keel v. LarkinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Hyman v. Porter (In Re Porter)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · 1984
  2. Drummond v. DrummondSupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
  3. Michie v. BradshawSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  4. Bank of Columbia v. McElroySupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
  5. Birmingham Property Co. v. Jackson Securities & Investment Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1933

7 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