Legal Opinion

Donaldson v. Foreman

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 16, 1925No. 4 Div. 201PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The suit was for damages to an automobile, sustained in a collision with another automobile. The pleadings were in short by consent.

The demurrer to the complaint challenged its sufficiency on the grounds that it was not averred that the agent or employee of defendant, having charge or control of said car, was acting within the line and scope of his employment, that the grounds of recovery are disjunctively averred, and that each alternative averment is not sufficient to support a recovery on the facts averred as showing actionable negligence.

It is settled law that the principal is not…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. McMillan v. AikenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
  2. National Park Bank v. L. & N. R. R.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1917
  3. Morrison v. ClarkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  4. Mobile Light R. Co. v. GadikSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
  5. J. H. Burton Sons Co. v. MaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1925

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Conway v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
  2. Peck v. HendersonAlabama Court of Appeals · 1928
  3. Sunshine Homes v. HoganCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1981
  4. Burress v. DupreeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1971
  5. City of Birmingham v. NorwoodAlabama Court of Appeals · 1929

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

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

Powered by the Exa API