DePoister v. Gilmer

Supreme Court of Alabama

DePoister v. Gilmer

82 Ala. 435

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedDecember 15, 1886

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 82 Ala. 435 (DePoister v. Gilmer) 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

DePoister v. Gilmer, 82 Ala. 435 (Ala. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

SOMERVILLE, J.

— The evidence tended to show, and from it the jury were authorized to infer, that the plaintiff was in the actual occupancy of the land in controversy, through his agent; and the testimony also tended to identify this land as being the same with the tract called “the Morgan S. Gilmer land,” which is shown to have been trespassed on by the defendant. The general affirmative charge, therefore, requested in behalf of the defendant, which was equivalent to a demurrer to the evidence, was properly refused by the court, because it infringed on the prerogative of the jury.

Affirmed.

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

SOMERVILLE, J.

— The evidence tended to show, and from it the jury were authorized to infer, that the plaintiff was in the actual occupancy of the land in controversy, through his agent; and the testimony also tended to identify this land as being the same with the tract called “the Morgan S. Gilmer land,” which is shown to have been trespassed on by the defendant. The general affirmative charge, therefore, requested in behalf of the defendant, which was equivalent to a demurrer to the evidence, was properly refused by the court, because it infringed on the prerogative of the jury.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 Ala. 435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/depoister-v-gilmer-ala-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack