Legal Opinion

Wainwright v. Anderton

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 24, 1929No. 6 Div. 168PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The appeal is from an order granting a new trial where the evidence was in sharp conflict. That ruling and judgment was by the judge, who heard the oral examination of the witnesses. The same inference and-presumption in favor of this ruling or action in granting the new trial is indulged as in a case where the motion for a new trial is refused. Walker v. St. Louis-San F. R. Co., 214 Ala. 492, 108 So. 388; Ex parte Landers, 214 Ala. 20, 106 So. 225; Cobb v. Malone, 92 .Ala. 630, 9 So. 738; Nobles v. Bank of Eclectic, 217 Ala. 124, 115 So. 13.

We have carefully examined the evidence, and it is…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Walker v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1926
  2. Ex Parte LandersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  3. Smith v. Tombigbee & Northern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1904
  4. Nobles v. Bank of EclecticSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gordon v. GleasonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
  2. Burger v. WattsAlabama Court of Appeals · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API