Legal Opinion

Poole v. Griffith

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 24, 1927No. 8 Div. 945PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The case was submitted to the court on an agreed statement of facts. The question of misjoinder of actions and parties, and the right of elimination thereof, by amendment, need not be again restated. Wright v. McCord, 205 Ala. 122, 88 So. 150.

The following facts are shown by recitals and exhibits: On October 23, 1924, one Bradley began suit on a promissory note in the county court against W. G. and Matt Grifiith; in aid thereof there was an attachment against Matt Griffith levied on four bales of cotton, amended at trial, so as to make same against “both of said defendants”; the cotton was…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. Kimberly v. . PatchinNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  2. Austin v. BeanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
  3. Kennedy v. First National BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
  4. Smyth v. TankersleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
  5. Wright v. McCordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Majors v. KillianSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
  2. Webb v. FrenchSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  3. Holder v. Elmwood CorporationSupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
  4. Harbin v. O'RearSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
  5. Kibbe v. ScholesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929

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