Choctaw C. & M. Co. v. Moore

63 So. 558, 184 Ala. 449, 1913 Ala. LEXIS 596
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 20, 1913
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 63 So. 558 (Choctaw C. & M. Co. v. Moore) 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
Choctaw C. & M. Co. v. Moore, 63 So. 558, 184 Ala. 449, 1913 Ala. LEXIS 596 (Ala. 1913).

Opinion

ANDERSON, J.

— Counts similar to 1, 2, and 3, have been repeatedly held good as against such grounds of demurrer as those here taken.

Plea 8, if not otherwise bad, was defective for failing to set out the safe way that was open to the plaintiff; that there was a safe or safer way was but the conclusion of the pleader. Indeed, this plea was subsequently amended so as to set out the safe or safer way and to which, as amended, there was no demurrer.

The question to the plaintiff, as to who had superintendence of him under the rules of the defendant, was not objectionable as a mere conclusion, and there was no error in overruling the appellant’s objection.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Dowdell, C. J., and Mayeield and de Graeeenried, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Marbury Lumber Co. v. Heinege
85 So. 453 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
63 So. 558, 184 Ala. 449, 1913 Ala. LEXIS 596, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/choctaw-c-m-co-v-moore-ala-1913.