McAfee v. Glen Mary Coal & Coke Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from City Court of Anniston. Tried before Hon. B. F. Cassady. The only error assigned is the action of the court in sustaining plaintiff’s demurrers to the defendant’s pleas.
Read the full summary
Appeal from City Court of Anniston. Tried before Hon. B. F. Cassady. The only error assigned is the action of the court in sustaining plaintiff’s demurrers to the defendant’s pleas. The demurrers are as follows: 2. “For that there is no sufficient statement of the facts in said plea which are relied on as a defense to the cause of action set out in said complaint.” 3. “For that said plea does not sufficiently' state the facts relied on as a defense so that the plaintiff is informed of the defense intended to be made under said plea.” To said plea No. 3: 1st. For that there is no sufficient…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.
— Action on promissory note alleged to have been executed by W. W. McAfee, the defendant, and D. W. and D. M. Kogers who are not sued. The pleas were: (1.) thai defendant “never promised or undertook in the manner and form alleged,” (2.) “that there was no consideration to defendant for the note or obligation which is the foundation of this suit,” and (3.) “that there is a failure of consideration in the note or obligation the foundation of this suit,” The action of the trial court in sustaining demurrers to the 2nd and 3rd pleas is assigned as error.
The 2nd plea was manifestly bad in that it…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Carmelich v. MimsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. IngramSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
- Clikas v. SteeleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1971
- Meyer v. BlochSupreme Court of Alabama · 1903