Legal Opinion

Schock v. Bear

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 18, 1948No. 1 Div. 293PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STAKELY, Justice.

This is an action for fraud in which plaintiffs claim that the defendants, by false and fraudulent representation, ... duced the plaintiffs to relinquish their leasehold interest in and to certain real property at No. 12 North Cedar Street, Mobile, Alabama, to the damage of plaintiffs. The alleged misrepresentation was in substance that the improvements on the property had been condemned. Trial of the case resulted in a verdict and judgment for the plaintiffs. Hence this appeal.

I. It is claimed that the court should have given the affirmative charge for the defendants because…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Coleman v. PepperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1909
  2. Southern Building & Loan Ass'n v. DinsmoreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  3. Cartwright v. HughesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  4. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. BizzellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1901
  5. Birmingham Electric Co. v. ShephardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Treadwell Ford, Inc. v. LeekSupreme Court of Alabama · 1961
  2. Boriss v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1954
  3. Universal Brokers, Inc. v. HigdonCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1975
  4. Alabama Power Company v. RembertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1968
  5. Grady v. WallaceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1961

2 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