Deas v. Garrett & Mason

Alabama Court of Appeals

Deas v. Garrett & Mason

80 So. 146, 16 Ala. App. 572, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 248

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 19, 1918

Docket1 Div. 282.

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 80 So. 146 (Deas v. Garrett & Mason) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Deas v. Garrett & Mason, 80 So. 146, 16 Ala. App. 572, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 248 (Ala. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWN, P. J.

[1] The verdict of the jury as incorporated in the judgment of the court is in proper form, assessing separately the alternate value of each article of property sued for, and the failure of the judgment to follow the verdict in respect to the ascertainment of the alternate value separately of each of the articles of property is an error which may be corrected from the data afforded by the record, and this will be done. Code 1907, § 2890; Jean v. Sandiford, 39 Ala. 317; Kyle v. Caravello, 103 Ala. 150, 15 South. 527; Reynolds v. Cox, 108 Ala. 276, 19 South. 395.

[2] The appeal bond to the justice court is conditioned substantially in compliance with the statute, and authorizes the rendition of the judgment against the sureties thereon. The judgment will be corrected so as to assess separately the value of each article of property sued for, and recovered by the plaintiff, and as corrected will be affirmed.

Judgment corrected and affirmed.

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

BROWN, P. J.

[1] The verdict of the jury as incorporated in the judgment of the court is in proper form, assessing separately the alternate value of each article of property sued for, and the failure of the judgment to follow the verdict in respect to the ascertainment of the alternate value separately of each of the articles of property is an error which may be corrected from the data afforded by the record, and this will be done. Code 1907, § 2890; Jean v. Sandiford, 39 Ala. 317; Kyle v. Caravello, 103 Ala. 150, 15 South. 527; Reynolds v. Cox, 108 Ala. 276, 19 South. 395.

[2] The appeal bond to the justice court is conditioned substantially in compliance with the statute, and authorizes the rendition of the judgment against the sureties thereon. The judgment will be corrected so as to assess separately the value of each article of property sued for, and recovered by the plaintiff, and as corrected will be affirmed.

Judgment corrected and affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 So. 146, 16 Ala. App. 572, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deas-v-garrett-mason-alactapp-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack