Davenport v. Witt
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtSayre, J.
We can see no merit in that assignment of error taking the point that defendants’ demurrer to the several counts of the complaint should have been sustained. The action, both its original and final shape — an intervening amendment having been withdrawn — was against defendants, appellants, as executors, etc., and, as for the rest, was in Code form. Code, § 5382, p. 1195.
The claim in dispute arose out of the operation of a telephone line from Cedar Bluff, in Cherokee county, to Rome, Ga. Plaintiff, defendants’ testator, and others owned the line jointly. By agreement plaintiff operated the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Rice v. Schloss & KahnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Hinson v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Bolling v. FanninSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
- Broda v. GreenwaldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Bolling v. SpellerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hunter v. ParkmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
- Snodgrass v. SnodgrassSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
- Ruttenberg v. FriedmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 2012
- Walker v. First Nat. Bank of FairfieldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Hunter v. ParkmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1956