Hodges v. Wallace

47 So. 1005, 157 Ala. 453, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 215
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided December 17, 1908·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SIMPSON, J.

— 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.

Tyson, C. J., and Dowdell and Denson, JJ., concur.

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

Hodges v. Wallace, 47 So. 1005, 157 Ala. 453, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 215 (Ala. 1908).

47 So. 1005 (Hodges v. Wallace) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Louis K. Liggett Co. v. Amos
141 So. 153 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1932)