Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Summers
Alabama Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
SAMFORD, Judge.
It is urged by counsel for appellee that the smallness of the amount involved in this case should in a large measure influence this court to a conclusion that errors committed by the trial court should be overlooked and the judgment be affirmed under Supreme Court Rule 45. We cannot agree to that contention. Parties litigant are entitled to have their causes tried in nisi .prius courts free from substantial error and when error is made to appear by the record this court must declare the law as it finds it regardless of the amount involved.
The appeal in this case is on the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fike v. StrattonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
- Clark v. RyanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- Woodward Iron Co. v. FrazierSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
3Cited by4 opinions
- National Labor Relations Board v. Waterman Steamship Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- UNITED STEELWORKERS, ETC. v. University of Ala.District Court, N.D. Alabama · 1977
- Great Atlantic Pacific Tea Company v. SummersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Holland v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1940