Jones v. Buckley
Supreme Court of Alabama
ERROR to tbe City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. Alexander McKinstry. In eases of appeal from justices’ courts, if the amount in controversy he over twenty dollars, there must be a statement of the cause of action, and though such statement is not required to be in conformity with technical rules of pleading, yet it should sot forth a substantial cause of action, and contain the material facts of a declaration. — 4 Por. 509 ; 1 Ala. 297 ; 1 Stew. 260, No amount is…
Read the full summary
ERROR to tbe City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. Alexander McKinstry. In eases of appeal from justices’ courts, if the amount in controversy he over twenty dollars, there must be a statement of the cause of action, and though such statement is not required to be in conformity with technical rules of pleading, yet it should sot forth a substantial cause of action, and contain the material facts of a declaration. — 4 Por. 509 ; 1 Ala. 297 ; 1 Stew. 260, No amount is mentioned in the statement in this case, hut the amount in controversy is ascertained by the recovery. — Cothran v. Weir,…
1Opinion of the CourtColeman, J.
The plaintiff in the court' below recovered a verdict and judgment for fifty-three dollars^ upon an appeal from á justice of the peace. The defendant demurred to the plaintiff’s statement or declaration, which is in these words :
“ Ann Buckley,- ) Plaintiff claims from defendant for the v. > work and labor,- care and diligence of her FRancis Jones, ) minor son,- Peter.”
Although this court has said that it will not scrutinize proceedings of this sort by the' technical rules of pleading, yet it has uniformly held that the plaintiff’s statement must set forth á substantial cause of action.- The…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Mobile & Ohio Railroad v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Ganaway v. Mayor of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852