Graham v. Werfel
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
FOSTER, Justice.
Count 1 of the complaint shows a duty owing by defendant to plaintiff, and alleges a negligent breach of that duty, from which plaintiff was injured as a proximate result.
It was not subject to the demurrer .interposed to it. Dozier v. Woods, 190 Ala. 279, 67 So. 283; Maddox v. Jones, 205 Ala. 598, 89 So. 38; Buffalo Rock Co. v. Davis, 228 Ala. 603, 154 So. 556; Strickland v. Davis, 221 Ala. 247, 128 So. 233; Ruffin C. & T. Co. v. Rich, 214 Ala. 633, 108 So. 596; Louis Pizitz Dry Goods Co. v. Cusimano, 206 Ala. 689, 91 So. 779.
Count 2 alleges a direct wanton or willful injury…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Godfrey v. VinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- Cooper v. AgeeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Birmingham Electric Co. v. MannSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Louis Pizitz Dry Goods Co. v. CusimanoSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Karpeles v. City Ice Delivery Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1916
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Jackson v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Florida · 1940
- Jack Cole, Inc. v. WalkerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
- McGough Bakeries Corporation v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
- Alabama Power Co. v. BowersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1949
- Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. SwainSupreme Court of Alabama · 1947
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.