Legal Opinion

Haynes v. Phillips

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 17, 1924No. 6 Div. 889PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The suit is for slander. The time of the alleged slander was under the videlicet; and though it is alleged to have been on August 7, 1919, and the proof 'shows that the alleged statement was about August 7, 1919, the variance would not warrant the giving of the , affirmative charge. Hill Gro. Co. v. Caldwell (Ala. Sup.) 99 South. 354; Dothan Gro. Co. v. Dowling, 204 Ala. 224, 85 South. 498; Western Assur. Co. v. Hann, 201 Ala. 376, 78 South. 232; Cent. L. & T. Co. v. McClure L. Co., 180 Ala. 606, 61 South. 821; Henry v. McNamara, 114 Ala. 107, 22 South. 428.

The general affirmative charge…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. McMillan v. AikenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
  2. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. FosheeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
  3. Amerson v. Corona Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1915
  4. Alabama Consolidated Coal & Iron Co. v. HealdSupreme Court of Alabama · 1908
  5. Wright v. McCordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Roth v. ScruggsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  2. Ruffin v. CrowellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
  3. Isbell v. BraySupreme Court of Alabama · 1951
  4. Bridwell v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  5. Ex parte GodfreySupreme Court of Alabama · 1963

2 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