Legal Opinion

Smith v. Eshelman

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 13, 1938No. 2 Div. 99PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOSTER, Justice.

This is a bill in equity, and the opinion of the trial judge shows that its sufficiency is challenged on the ground that the facts averred do not constitute a gift causa mortis.

The facts averred which seem to control the questions are succinctly stated as follows :

“James Daniel Caddell, ,in expectation of death then imminent, and a patient at the Baptist Hospital at Selma, Alabama, preparing jto undergo an operation, delivers to Doctor T. C. Cameron' a letter Exhibit A to the Bill of Complaint, requesting Doctor Cameron to open same in case of his (J. D. Caddell’s) death, said…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Basket v. HassellSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. George Van Camp & Sons Co. v. American Can Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1929
  3. Jones v. DeyerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
  4. Jones v. WeakleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
  5. Robertson v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1905

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Limestone County v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  2. Cannon v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942
  3. Barham v. KhouryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  4. Clark v. YoungSupreme Court of Alabama · 1944
  5. Farish v. HawkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941

7 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