Jones v. Coley
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
GARDNER, J:
Action of detinue for the recovery of a mule. ' There was verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and .defendant 'appeals.
Each of the parties to this suit had lost a mule, and each is emphatic the mule sued for is his Own. The sole question of fact related to the identity of the mule, and the-evidence was in sharp conflict. During the progress of the trial, by agreement of counsel the jury inspected the mule then in the courthouse yards. We see no objection in tbe court permitting plaintiff to state that tbe mule inspected on that day was not in as good condition as it was when he saw…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Alabama Power Co. v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
- Oliver v. HerronSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Hanye v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Sowell v. Bank of BrewtonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- New York Life Ins. Co. v. TurnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Christiansen v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1990
- Williams v. Dan River Mills, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1971
- Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Conference America v. Telecom. Co-OpSupreme Court of Alabama · 2004
- Golden v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1958
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.