Legal Opinion

Birmingham Water Works Co. v. Barksdale

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 12, 1933No. 6 Div. 395PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KNIGHT, Justice.

The first insistence for error on the part of appellant is that the court improperly allowed the plaintiff a struck jury in the cause, after the plaintiff had announced that he was satisfied with the jury which had been placed in the box for the trial of the cause, and after the defendant had peremptorily challenged two of said panel.

In order that what took place in the selection of the jury to try this case may fully appear, we quote from the bill of exceptions on this point: “After both plaintiff and defendant had announced ready for trial, and the jury was placed in the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Southern Ry. Co. v. DicksonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
  2. McArthur v. Carrie's Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
  3. Best Park & Amusement Co. v. RollinsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
  4. Jackson v. VaughnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
  5. American Ry. Express Co. v. ReidSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. O'Bar v. Southern Life Health Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1936
  2. Butler v. WaltonAlabama Court of Appeals · 1951
  3. Tennessee Valley Sand & Gravel Co. v. PillingAlabama Court of Appeals · 1950
  4. Christian Benevolent Burial Ass'n v. HuffSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
  5. Alabama Utilities Co. v. ChampionSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935

8 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