Legal Opinion

Stump v. Bullock

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided May 20, 1988No. 86-1013Published

1Opinion of the Court

ADAMS, Justice.

Plaintiff, Sara Stump, argues that the trial court erred in allowing defendant Samuel Bullock, d/b/a Bud Bullock’s Union 76 service station, to assert a defense that she claims was barred by the court’s pretrial order and that it further erred in granting Bullock a summary judgment based upon that defense. We affirm.

Facts

On the morning of December 5, 1984, Robert Elliott phoned defendant Bullock’s service station and asked Bullock’s employee, Dannie Tolbert, to. tow his wife’s stalled automobile from the side of a road. The record indicates that Robert Elliott knew that this…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Arfor-Brynfield, Inc. v. Huntsville Mall AssociatesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1985
  2. Hardy v. SawyerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1977

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API