Legal Opinion

Birmingham Finance Co. v. Barber

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided April 8, 1924No. 6 Div. 228PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.

The demurrer to the complaint on the ground of a misjoinder is not well taken. The complaint itself alleges that the money sued for in count B relates to the same transaction as is set out in count A. Hines v. Laurendine, 17 Ala. App. 350, 84 South. 780.

Before we would be authorized to consider an exception to an excerpt from the court’s oral charge, it must be made to appear by the bill of exceptions, that the objection was made and the exception was taken, in open court and before the jury retired to consider its verdict. This does not so ap pear in tlie record. Moreover tire judge by…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hines v. LaurendineAlabama Court of Appeals · 1920

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Parsons v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1946
  2. Elliott v. McCraneyAlabama Court of Appeals · 1935
  3. Elliott v. McCraneyAlabama Court of Appeals · 1935
  4. Parsons v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1946
  5. Piatt v. HiltyAlabama Court of Appeals · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API