Legal Opinion

Ohme v. Bisimanis

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 22, 1931No. 3 Div. 942PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BOÜLDIN, J.

The action was for alleged personal injury to plaintiff, a pedestrian, charged to the negligence of defendants in striking him with an automobile at the intersection of Adams and Court streets in the city of Montgomery.

The injury complained of was a double hernia resulting from such collision. There was verdict for plaintiff.

Defendants moved for a new trial. Ground No. 3 of said motion reads:

“On account of newly discovered evidence, material to the defendants, which defendants could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and produced on the trial.”

The alleged injury was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Acklen's v. HickmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
  2. Fries v. Acme White Lead & Color WorksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
  3. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W. v. ScrewsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Mutual Building & Loan Ass'n v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  2. Camp v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  3. Brown v. Standard Casket Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1937
  4. Avco Corporation v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1970
  5. Birmingham Electric Co. v. TonerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948

3 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