Legal Opinion

Hunter v. Lauderdale Cotton Mills

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 31, 1927No. 1 Div. 441PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion.

BOULDXN, J.

Prepaid freight, upon failure of the carrier to perform the contract of carriage, may be recovered in an action for money had and received, no express contract to the contrary appearing. The consideration for the advance payment having failed, the money paid becomes ex equo et bono the property of the shipper, and the law raises an implied contract to refund. Norton-Crossing Co. v. Martin, 202 Ala. 569, 81 So. 71.

Appellant does not question this rule, Dut seeks a reduction for the amount paid out under conditions stated in plea 10. Count 5 alleges that the amount claimed…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wilson v. SergeantSupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
  2. Norton-Crossing Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
  3. Haney v. ConolySupreme Court of Alabama · 1876

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Rhodes v. TomlinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API