Fiquette v. Sanders

Alabama Court of Appeals

Fiquette v. Sanders

62 So. 325, 8 Ala. App. 501, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 215

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 24, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 62 So. 325 (Fiquette v. Sanders) 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

Fiquette v. Sanders, 62 So. 325, 8 Ala. App. 501, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 215 (Ala. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

WALKER, P. J.

— Whether or not the defendant’s motion to quash the summons in the cause and to set aside the service because of the complaint not having been signed by the plaintiff or her attorney (Code, § 5297) was well taken, all ground of objection on this score was removed by the plaintiff’s amending her complaint by having it signed by her attorney and by the defendant’s taking issue on the complaint. If the court erred in its disposition of the motion, the error was cured by the subsequent proceedings.

There was evidence tending to support the averments of the complaint, as it was amended after the conclusion’of the evidence, and the court properly refused to give the written charges requested by the defendant.

Affirmed.

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

WALKER, P. J.

— Whether or not the defendant’s motion to quash the summons in the cause and to set aside the service because of the complaint not having been signed by the plaintiff or her attorney (Code, § 5297) was well taken, all ground of objection on this score was removed by the plaintiff’s amending her complaint by having it signed by her attorney and by the defendant’s taking issue on the complaint. If the court erred in its disposition of the motion, the error was cured by the subsequent proceedings.

There was evidence tending to support the averments of the complaint, as it was amended after the conclusion’of the evidence, and the court properly refused to give the written charges requested by the defendant.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 So. 325, 8 Ala. App. 501, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fiquette-v-sanders-alactapp-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack