Legal Opinion

Birmingham Electric Co. v. Guess

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 30, 1930No. 6 Div. 561PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The count as amended was free from the ground of demurrer that the facts averred did not sustain the charge of wantonness or willfulness as stated in the appropriate count. Blackburn v. Central of Ga. Ry. Co., 185 Ala. 635, 64 So. 592; Jackson v. Vaughn, 204 Ala. 543, 86 So. 469.

There was, however, no ambiguity and uncertainty in the averment of facts employed in the complaint and the use of the words “said servants and agents”; there was no mention of servants or agents thereto to cause confusion, and “said” was capable of being omitted because of the want of an antecedent to which it may…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway v. CrosbySupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
  2. B'ham Ry. L. & P. Co. v. BarrettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  3. Jackson v. VaughnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
  4. B'ham Ry. L. & P. Co. v. CockrumSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  5. Birmingham Railway & Electric Co. v. WildmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Birmingham Electric Co. v. MannSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  2. Keener v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1977
  3. Koonce v. CraftSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
  4. Cooper v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API