Hodges v. Wallace
This text of 47 So. 1005 (Hodges v. Wallace) 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.
Opinion
— In this case the appellants do not insist on the assignments in regard to rulings on demurrers, hut only on those assignments regarding rulings on motions to strike replications, rejoinders, and rebutters. As neither the motions nor said pleadings sought to he stricken are set out in the bill of exceptions, under the rulings of this court they cannot be considered.—Holley v. Coffee, 123 Ala. 406, 26 South. 239; Cottingham v. Greely-Barnham Gro. Co., 129 Ala. 200, 30 South. 560, 87 Am. St. Rep. 58; Harrison a. Alabama Midland Ry. Co., 144 Ala. 246, 40 South. 394; Etna Life Ins. Co. v. Lasseter, 153 Ala. 630, 45 South. 166, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 252; 3 Ency. Pl. & Pr. 400, 401. Consequently the cause must be affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
47 So. 1005, 157 Ala. 453, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hodges-v-wallace-ala-1908.