Legal Opinion

Birmingham Electric Co. v. Mann

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 23, 1933No. 6 Div. 296PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GARDNER, Justice.

We consider the case of Byram & Co. v. Bryan, 224 Ala. 466, 140 So. 768, as authority in support of amended count 2 as against the demurrer interposed thereto, which is distinguishable from those counts where the facts are particularized. Blackmon v. Central of Georgia R. Co., 186 Ala. 635, 64 So. 592; Jones v. Keith, 223 Ala. 36, 134 So. 630; Southern R. Co. v. Weatherlow, 153 Ala. 171, 44 So. 1019.

True, as argued by counsel for appellant, the wantonness here charged must rest upon the servant’s or agent’s actual knowledge, and, if submission of the wanton count to the jury…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Birmingham Baptist Hospital, Inc. v. BlackwellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
  2. Southern Railway Co. v. BushSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
  3. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. CarterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
  4. F. W. Woolworth Co. v. EricksonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
  5. Jones v. KeithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Griffin Lumber Co. v. HarperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
  2. Espey v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1960
  3. Grandquest v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1961
  4. Hill v. SherwoodSupreme Court of Alabama · 1986
  5. Blount Brothers Construction Company v. RoseSupreme Court of Alabama · 1962

36 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