Abney v. Mize
This text of 46 So. 230 (Abney v. Mize) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The plaintiff’s replication to the special pleas was a good answer thereto, and not subject to the demurrers. Moreover, it was but a general traverse as to pleas 4 and 5, as each of said pleas aver that no more force was used than was- necessary, and the replication was but a denial of this averment.
Charges 1 and 2, refused the defendants, are so manifestly bad that a discussoin of them is unnecessary.
Charge 4, requested by the defendants, was properly refused. If not otherwise bad, it invades the province of the jury, and instructs a finding for the defendants, although more force may have been used than was necessary for self-protection. All of the elements of self-defense set up in the charge may have existed, yet it was for the jury to determine if the force used was excessive.
Charge A, given for the plaintiff, asserts the law.
The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 So. 230, 155 Ala. 391, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abney-v-mize-ala-1908.