Edisto Phosphate Co. v. Standford
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Limestone. Tried before the Hon. Heiiry C. Speak®. This action was brought by the appellant against the appellees, and counted upon a promissory note, which was given by the defendants for the price of fertilizer purchased from the plaintiff. The only rulings of the court which are reviewed on the present appeal, are sufficiently shown in the opinion. The appeal is taken from a judgment in favor of the defendants.
1Opinion of the CourtHaralson, J.
Among the pleas filed by the defendants, upon which the plaintiff took issue, and on which the case was tried, was the 5th, which reads : “That the consideration of the obligation sued on was and is illegal in this, that the plaintiff did not have a license from the Commissioner of Agriculture to make sale of the fertilizer for which the obligation sued on was given.” A demurrer to this plea was overruled, the correctness of which ruling is not questioned on assignment of error. The burden of proving, under this plea, that the plaintiff had a license to make sales of the fertilizer was on the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Elyton Land Co. v. DennySupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Rogers v. BrooksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Toliver v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- Moore, Marsh & Co. v. Penn & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1891
3Cited by8 opinions
- Goodale v. MurraySupreme Court of Iowa · 1940
- Electric Lighting Co. of Mobile v. Elder Bros.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Liner v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- Walls v. Decatur Fertilizer Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- Talladega Fertilizer & Mfg. Co. v. Farmers' Union Wharehouse Co.Alabama Court of Appeals · 1911
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.