Legal Opinion

Coosa Portland Cement Co. v. Crankfield

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 28, 1918No. 7 Div. 960PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Qlair Comity; J. E. Blackwood, Judge. Suit by Emeline Crankfield, administratrix, against the Coosa Portland Cement Company. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The suit was for personal •injury sustained by plaintiff’s intestate.

[1, 2] The first assignment of error challenges refusal of the trial court to give defendant’s written charge which we denominate “A.” it was:

“The court charges the jury that the showing introduced in evidence as to what the witness E. A. Hardin would testify is entitled to the same weight and consideration at your hands as if Hardin had appeared in person and testified thereto on the witness stand.”

The rule of continuance declared by statute is:

“The party applying for the continuance of any civil action must state in. the…

2Cases cited52 opinions

  1. Crawford v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  2. Titus v. Bradford etc. R., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, McKean County1890
  3. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Allen's Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
  4. Dwight Manufacturing Co. v. HolmesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  5. Mobile & Ohio R. R. v. ThomasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hall v. MilliganSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API