Legal Opinion

City of Birmingham v. Martin

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 18, 1934No. 6 Div. 240PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, Justice.

The complaint was in one count for simple negligence. Defendant’s demurrers were overruled and defendant filed its plea in short by consent.

The description of the place of the accident in the sworn claim was sufficient for the purpose of information to the city of the time and place of the accident- — -technical accuracy was not required of such sworn statement, only that the city be reasonably and fairly informed of the facts, as to the amount of damages and the location of the place of the injury, so that the city could intelligently investigate the allowance or the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. McMillan v. AikenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
  2. City Council of Montgomery v. WrightSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
  3. City of Bessemer v. WhaleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
  4. Grambs v. City of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
  5. McKinnon v. City of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Kmart Corp. v. BassettSupreme Court of Alabama · 2000
  2. Jacks v. City of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1958
  3. City of Birmingham v. BowenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
  4. de Castro v. Junta de Comisionados de San JuanSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1942
  5. City of Birmingham v. LevensSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941

9 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