Legal Opinion

Kirkland v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 17, 1936No. 4 Div. 898PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BOULDIN, Justice.

The action is in tort for personal injuries. The complaint, to which demurrers were sustained, charged that defendant was a retail grocery, selling foodstuffs, including flour; that the agent or servant of defendant, acting in the line and scope of employment, negligently sold to plaintiff a sack of flour containing calcium arsenate, a poison; that plaintiff ate biscuits prepared from this flour, was poisoned and made sick.

Under the liberal rule of pleading long established with us, if a complaint in. tort discloses a duty of care in the matter complained of, a general…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Rinaldi v. . Mohican Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
  2. Canavan v. . City of MechanicvilleNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
  3. Travis v. L. & N. R. R.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1913
  4. Birmingham Chero-Cola Bottling Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  5. Bigelow v. Maine Central RailroadSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1912

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Allen v. Delchamps, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1993
  2. Sencer v. Carl's MarketSupreme Court of Florida · 1950
  3. Stokely-Van Camp, Inc. v. FergusonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1959
  4. McCauley v. Manda Brothers Provisions CompanySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1968
  5. Bradford v. Moore Brothers Feed and GrocerySupreme Court of Alabama · 1958

12 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