Legal Opinion
Cotton v. Courtright
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided December 16, 1926No. 1 Div. 384PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
The trial without a jury resulted in a judgment for the defendant. We must review the evidence. A part thereof was by way of depositions, and the rule that the trial judge heard and saw the witnesses will not be applied to support the judgment. Hodge v. Joy, 207 Ala. 198, 92 So. 171; Finney v. Studebaker Corp., 196 Ala. 422, 72 So. 54.
The complaint consisted of counts based on the notes and the common counts for money had and received. The pleas were the general issue, non est factum, payment, and want of consideration.
Where a note imparts a prima facie personal liability on the maker, this…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hodge v. JoySupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Finney v. Studebaker Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Christie v. DurdenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Little v. People's BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
- Lutz v. Van Heynigen Brokerage Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1917
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pointer v. Farmers' Fertilizer Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1935
- Louis Pizitz Dry Goods Co. v. House of Van Praag, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Soper v. PointerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1933
- Soper v. PointerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1933