Evans v. Southern Railway Co.

133 Ala. 482
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 15, 1901
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 133 Ala. 482 (Evans v. Southern Railway Co.) 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
Evans v. Southern Railway Co., 133 Ala. 482 (Ala. 1901).

Opinion

SHARPE, J.

'Count 1 of the complaint first filed in the circuit court, was in case and count 2 was in assumpsit. Those counts were impropely joined. — Morris v. Eufaula Nat. Bank, 122 Ala. 580.

Count 3 was not subject to the demurrer. An agreement by a railroad company with a landowner to build and maintain fences and cattle guards in consideration of his grant of a right of way, is prima facie binding on the company to pay the landowner for injuries to his animals entering on the track in consequence of the company’s fault in failing to maintain fences in accordance with the terms of the contract. — Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Barnes, 116 Ind. 126; 38 Am. & Eng. R. Cases, 297; Louisville, etc., R. R. Co. v. Sumner (Ind.), 24 Am. & Eng. R. Cases, 641; Ky. Cent. R. Co. v. Kenney (Ky.) 20 Am. & Eng. R. Cases, 458.

While such a contract is continuing, breaches of it may be several and continuing. — Phelps v. The New Haven, etc., R. Co., 43 Conn. 453. It is, therefore, unnecessary for a complaint in declaring on the contract to aver when the contract was first broken.

If the contract was not in writing and is for that reason obnoxious to the statute of frauds the objection is [486]*486matter for plea and not for demurrer. — Strouse v. Elting, 110 Ala. 132.

Recitals in the minute entries are not proper evidence on appeal- that exceptions were taken to rulings on the several motions assigned for‘error, and there being no bill of exceptions those assignments are without support.

Reversed and remanded.

Tyson, J., concurs- in the result, but dissents as to the first point,'being of the opinion that count 2 is in case and that there was no misjoinder. — White v. Levy, 91 Ala. 179; City Nat. Bank v. Jeffries, 73 Ala. 191.

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

Related

Wilder v. Clark
81 So. 2d 273 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1955)
Harris v. Barber
186 So. 160 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1939)
Drennen Motor Co. v. Patrick
141 So. 681 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)
McDonald v. McDonald
110 So. 291 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
Grand Bay Land Co. v. Simpson
81 So. 548 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1919)
Curry v. Southern Railway Co.
42 So. 447 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1906)
Dorough v. Harrington & Sons
42 So. 557 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
133 Ala. 482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/evans-v-southern-railway-co-ala-1901.