Farrow v. Wooley

138 Ala. 267
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1902·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

.DOWDELL, -T.

The undisputed evidence in this case showed üi at no force or violence was used in taking the cotton, and that the legal title to the cotton was in Tillman, from whom the defendant purchased it. The defendant was entitled to the affirmative charge as requested, and the court erred in its refusal. — Jordan v. Lindsay, 132 Ala. 567, 31 So. Rep. 484; Code, 1896, § 2712.

The case of Collier v. Faulk, 69 Ala. 58, and Adams v. State, 87 Ala. 89, and the other cases following the Collier v. Faulh decision, in addition to those mentioned in Jordan v. Lindsay, supra, must be overruled.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Farrow v. Wooley, 138 Ala. 267 (Ala. 1902).

138 Ala. 267 (Farrow v. Wooley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stewart v. Young
103 So. 44 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1925)
Lauderdale v. Flippo Son
75 So. 323 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1917)