Legal Opinion

Ewart v. Cunningham

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 11, 1929No. 6 Div. 311PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBouldin, J.

The appeal is from a judgment upon executing a writ of inquiry before a jury upon judgment by default.

A former judgment was reversed, because the writ of inquiry was executed by the trial judge upon plaintiff’s attempted withdrawal of his demand for a jury without defendant’s consent. The order of this court was that such judgment “be reversed and the cause remanded for the execution of a proper writ of inquiry for the assessment of damages by a jury; the judgment by default being allowed to stand undisturbed.” Ewart-Brewer Motor Co. v. Cunningham, 213 Ala. 391, 104 So. 789. Under this…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. CarlockSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  2. George's Restaurant v. DukesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
  3. Bozeman v. DillardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  4. Attalla Oil & Fertilizer Co. v. GoddardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
  5. Copeland v. Dixie Const. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1927

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Cabot v. Clearwater Construction CompanySupreme Court of Florida · 1956
  2. Hughes v. CoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1992
  3. Southern Building & Loan Ass'n v. BryantSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  4. Harris v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
  5. Fortson v. HesterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1949

25 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