Legal Opinion

W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Deavours

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 18, 1923No. 6 Div. 199PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.

The plaintiff, appellant, sued to recover of H. V. Deavours and F. R. Banter, as guarantors, money due it by W. R. Deavours. The plaintiff in á manufacturer of medicines, toilet articles, etc. The business conducted is of an interstate character. Prior to Marehr-Ápril, 1915, W. R. Deavours had a contract to purchase articles of the plaintiff. He fell behind in his remittances, and on April 3,1915, made a new contract with the plaintiff. Attached to W. R. Deavours’ new contract, which was accepted and approved by the plaintiff on the Idstnamed date, was the following contract of guaranty to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Leftkovitz v. First National Bank of GadsdenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
  2. Donley v. CampSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
  3. Comstock v. GageIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
  4. New York Life Ins. v. ScheuerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  5. Holmes v. BlochSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Republic Steel Corporation v. GilbertAlabama Court of Appeals · 1955
  2. Standard Acc. Ins. Co. v. FellLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1941
  3. Walker v. W. T. Rawleigh Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
  4. W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. LangelandWashington Supreme Court · 1927
  5. J. R. Watkins Co. v. DanielSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934

5 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