Moss v. Winston
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.
Counts 1, 2, and 6, purporting to state a cause of action for the wrongful issuance of an attachment, were subject to the demurrers interposed thereto under the authority of Irwin v. Cotney, 214 Ala. 415, 108 So. 235, and the cases cited.
Counts 4 and 7 seek to recover for expense of litigation resulting from the defendant’s alleged breach of a contract as to the execution of a deed. The general rule here applicable is stated in 17 Corpus Juris, 807, as follows: “Apart from the sums allowable and taxed as costs, there can, as a general rule, be no recovery as damages of the costs and expenses…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- B'ham Ry. L. & P. Co. v. NicholasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
- United States H. & A. Ins. v. GoinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- W. B. Davis Son v. RupleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- Ryall v. AllenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1904
- Irwin v. CotneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
3Cited by8 opinions
- Reynolds v. First Alabama Bank of MontgomerySupreme Court of Alabama · 1985
- Clikos v. LongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
- Lenore Williamson Burgess, Individually and as Guardian of the Estate of Ethel Jackson Williamson, a Non Compos Mentis v. Warren Jackson WilliamsonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
- Scott Southern Division Employees Credit Union v. LoftinCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1973
- Francis v. ScottSupreme Court of Alabama · 1954
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.