Legal Opinion

Deholl v. Pim

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 18, 1929No. 6 Div. 314PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGabdner, J.

The complaint as originally filed on September 7, 1923, contained three counts. The third count was in detinue for recovery, of certain advertisement drawings on illustration boards. To this complaint, defendants in writing, on September 15,1923, filed the plea of the general issue. During the progress of the trial of the cause (February 22, 1928), plaintiff withdrew counts 1 and 2, and rested for recovery upon the detinue count, and defendants filed on that day the plea of general issue “in short by consent.” The plea of the general issue filed September 15, 1923, remained on file throughout…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Woodmen of the World v. MaynorSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  2. Gossett v. MorrowSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
  3. Moore v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
  4. Life Casualty Co. of Tennessee v. StreetSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  5. Kirkland v. EfordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Valenzuela v. SellersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1949
  2. Mixon v. WhitmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1966
  3. Burrow v. LeigeberSupreme Court of Alabama · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API