Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Sturgis

48 So. 810, 159 Ala. 222, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 675
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedFebruary 11, 1909
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 48 So. 810 (Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Sturgis) 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.

Bluebook
Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Sturgis, 48 So. 810, 159 Ala. 222, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 675 (Ala. 1909).

Opinion

ANDERSON, J.

The third count, filed as an amendment, was within the lis pendens, and related back to the original complaint, so as to intercept the running of the statute of limitations as against the amended count. —L. & N. R. R. v. Woods, 105 Ala. 561, 17 South. 41; Alabama Co. v. Heald, 154 Ala. 580, 45 South. 686. The suit having been brought within a year after the alleged injury, the cause of action was not barred, and the pleas were not proven, even if this action was barred by the statute of one year, instead of six, which Ave need not decide.— Rasco v. Jefferson, 142 Ala. 705, 38 South. 246; N. C. & St. L. R. R. v. Hill, 146 Ala. 240, 40 South. 612.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Dowdell, C. J., and McClellan and Mayfield, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad v. Barker
60 So. 486 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1912)
Alabama Consolidated Coal & Iron Co. v. Heald
53 So. 162 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 So. 810, 159 Ala. 222, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 675, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/central-of-georgia-railway-co-v-sturgis-ala-1909.