Ruffin Coal & Transfer Co. v. Rich
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtSayre, J.
[1] The statement of the case sets out the complaint as amended. Defend ant’s demurrer was properly overruled. The locus in quo of the accident is described as “on Second avenue, near Fourth street, in the city of Birminglíam, Jefferson county, Ala.,” and this was sufficient to apprise the defendant of the place of the negligence complained of, to the end that its defense might be intelligently prepared. In some of the cases cited by defendant to this point definite location, as for example, whether plaintiff was on defendant’s railroad track, was necessary in order to show a duty owing from…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Armstrong v. Montgomery Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Western Railway of Alabama v. MutchSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
- Morrison v. ClarkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. QuickSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- Dye-Washburn Hotel Co. v. AldridgeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Clark v. HudsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1956
- Louisville N. R. Co. v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
- Chambers v. CoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Capital Motor Lines v. GilletteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Strickland v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.