Legal Opinion

Trognitz v. Fry

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 31, 1927No. 1 Div. 443PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BOULDIÑ, J.

Count 1 is in Code form for trespass, with the added averment that one joint defendant was acting by and through the other. Code 1923, § 9531, Form 28. This Code form uses the general phrase “for a trespass” as definitive of the class of legal torts known as trespass. The form may be used in the plural, as well as the singular, joining all the parties participating in the trespass in such manner as to render him liable in that form of action.

Without question one may commit a trespass through another as his active agent ■or joint participant, although the one may not be present at…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. City Delivery Co. v. HenrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1903
  2. Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. AbernathySupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  3. Reed v. Ridout's Ambulance, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  4. Ex Parte Louisville & N. R. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1919
  5. Southern Railway Co. v. HanbySupreme Court of Alabama · 1910

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Southern Railway Company v. SanfordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1954
  2. C. O. Osborn Contracting Co. v. Alabama Gas Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1961
  3. Russell Corp. v. SullivanSupreme Court of Alabama · 2001
  4. Crowe v. City of AthensCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1999
  5. Wint v. Alabama Eye & Tissue BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1996

7 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