Legal Opinion
City of Birmingham v. Estes
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided January 17, 1935No. 6 Div. 548PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KNIGHT, Justice.
This action was commenced against the city of Birmingham, and the commissioners of said city, hut was subsequently amended by striking all parties defendant except the city of Birmingham.
The cause was tried on counts A and B added by amendment.
It is averred in count A that plaintiff in June, 1931, owned and was in possession of certain real property in the city of Birmingham, upon part of which his residence was located, and the residue of the property consisted of lots which were vacant.
It is averred that all of this property was in close proximity to a natural waterway known…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Isbell v. LennoxTexas Supreme Court · 1927
- Arndt v. City of CullmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
- City of Eufaula v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Jefferson Fertilizer Co. v. RichSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
- Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. v. YarbroughSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Long v. Jefferson CountySupreme Court of Alabama · 1993
- Howell v. City of DothanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- LEVENE ET UX. v. City of SalemOregon Supreme Court · 1951
- Tennessee Valley Sand & Gravel Co. v. PillingAlabama Court of Appeals · 1950
- WATER WORKS AND SEWER BD. OF TOWN OF ARDMORE v. WalesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1988
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.