Legal Opinion

Attalla Oil & Fertilizer Co. v. Goddard

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 6, 1922No. 7 Div. 293PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The trial, had upon counts 2, 3, and 4, resulted in verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff. Count 1 was eliminated by the charge of the court.

The sufficiency of count 2 wg,s challenged by demurrer, on the ground that it does not appear that defendants knew at the time they made said alleged false and fraudulent representations that said cotton seed meal contained only 4.84 per centum of ammonia, instead of 7 per centum, and only 24.84 per centum of protein, instead of 36 per centum. Thus is raised the question of sufficiency of the count as for deceit in sale of chattels. Distinction…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. German Alliance Insurance v. Home Water Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
  2. Willard v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  3. National Bank v. Grand LodgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  4. Johns v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
  5. Guardian Trust & Deposit Co. v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1906

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Geohagan v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1973
  2. Southern Building & Loan Ass'n v. BryantSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  3. Ewart v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
  4. Sealy v. McElroySupreme Court of Alabama · 1972
  5. Fite v. PearsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926

9 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