Legal Opinion

Gorman-Gammill Seed & Dairy Supply Co. v. Carlisle

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 24, 1929No. 6 Div. 329PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.

The note upon which this suit is based was given for the purchase price of a small light and water plant for use at the home of appellee, including his dairy. At the time of the installation of the plant, appellee executed a note due 90 days thereafter. It is claimed that another note was given in its renewal, and the note sued on was a second renewal. The interest was paid at each renewal. Before the last note was due, appellee notified appellant of his election to rescind. This was some 8 months after the plant was installed. It is claimed by appellee that the plant did not operate…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Stephenson v. AllisonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
  2. Hafer v. ColeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  3. J. A. Fay & Egan Co. v. Independent Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  4. McCoy v. PrinceAlabama Court of Appeals · 1914
  5. Baer & Co. v. Mobile Cooperage & Box Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1909

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Tiger Motor Co. v. McMurtrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1969
  2. Central of Georgia Railway Company v. RamseySupreme Court of Alabama · 1962
  3. McKee v. Club-View Heights, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1935
  4. Southern Building & Loan Ass'n v. ArgoSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  5. Salt Lake City v. StateUtah Supreme Court · 1942

6 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