Newell Contracting Co. v. Glenn
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtSayre, J.
Plaintiff (appellee) was unable to follow the Code form for the- common count on an open account, count 1. The count as drawn was defective as specifically pointed out, and defendant’s demurrer should have been sustained. Smythe v. Dothan F. & M. Co., 52 So. 398,166 Ala. 253. But the error complained of in this connection will not be allowed to work a reversal of the judgment, for the reason that the recovery must, under the evidence, be assigned to the count for work and labor done, the second count of the complaint. The second count, and indeed the whole complaint, was defective, for that…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Powell v. FolmarSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
- Mason v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1857
- Grand Bay Land Co. v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
- Moore v. First National Bank of FlorenceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1903
- Smythe v. Dothan F. & M. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1910
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Denson v. Kirkpatrick Drilling Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Whitehead v. BoutwellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- King v. ScottSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Birmingham Trust & Savings Co. v. Acacia Mut. Life Ass'nSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Cunningham v. LoweryCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1970
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.