Brown v. Alexander
Alabama Court of Appeals
Malicious Prosecution. Appeal from Birmingham City Conrl. Heard before Hon. IT. A. Siiakpe. Action by M. W. Alexander against W. A. Brown. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Read the full summary
Malicious Prosecution. Appeal from Birmingham City Conrl. Heard before Hon. IT. A. Siiakpe. Action by M. W. Alexander against W. A. Brown. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. The following charge was refused to the defendant: “(8) The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove to the reasonable satisfaction of the. jury that the de: fendant stated to plaintiff, or in his presence, on the occasion of plaintiff’s arrest of defendant at the house of defendant on the charge of assault and battery, that he (Brown) got up out of his chair, and put one Madeline Brown out of his house,…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, P. J.
If the demurrer to the complaint upon the ground, among others, that it “contains two *454separate and distinct causes of action” is to be regarded as suggesting that it contained but one count in which two separate and distinct causes of action, were commingled, it is, as to that ground of objection, based upon a mistaken assumption. The complaint is divided into two paragraphs, the first of which is in the code form of a complaint for malicious prosecution, and the second of which, commencing with the words, “The plaintiff further claims of the defendant,” substantially follows the code form of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hamm v. Hudson Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1987
- Hamm v. Hudson Industries, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1986