Eagle Iron Co. v. Malone

Supreme Court of Alabama

Eagle Iron Co. v. Malone

42 So. 734, 149 Ala. 367, 1906 Ala. LEXIS 7

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedDecember 19, 1906

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 42 So. 734 (Eagle Iron Co. v. Malone) 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

Eagle Iron Co. v. Malone, 42 So. 734, 149 Ala. 367, 1906 Ala. LEXIS 7 (Ala. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

TYSON, J. —

After the complaint was amended by striking out the name of Stewart as a party defendant, the remaining defendant should have been allowed to file the plea in abatement proposed by it. — Eagle Iron Co. v. Baugh, 147 Ala. 613, 41 South. 663. There can, of course, be no trial of the cause on its merits until this plea, when filed, is disposed of. We will, therefore, not consider any other assignment of error.

Reversed and remanded.

Haralson, Simpson, and Denson, JJ., concur.

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

TYSON, J. —

After the complaint was amended by striking out the name of Stewart as a party defendant, the remaining defendant should have been allowed to file the plea in abatement proposed by it. — Eagle Iron Co. v. Baugh, 147 Ala. 613, 41 South. 663. There can, of course, be no trial of the cause on its merits until this plea, when filed, is disposed of. We will, therefore, not consider any other assignment of error.

Reversed and remanded.

Haralson, Simpson, and Denson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 So. 734, 149 Ala. 367, 1906 Ala. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eagle-iron-co-v-malone-ala-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack