Howland v. Wallace

81 Ala. 238
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided December 15, 1886·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

STONE, C. J.

— The complaint in this case is an exact copy of the form given in the Code for a suit against a common carrier, for non-delivery of goods, and is sufficient. The demurrer to it was properly overruled. — Form 13, Code of 1876, 703. • A

The case was tried on the single defense of the general issue. That plea put in issue the material allegations of the complaint, and it did no more. Any defense, special in its nature, or reaching beyond such mere denial, the statute requires to be specially pleaded. — Code of 1876, § 2988; Petty v. Dill, 53 Ala. 641; Trammell v. Hudmon, 56 Ala. 235 ; Burns v. Campb ll, 71 Ala. 271, 294.

Infancy of plaintiff is not a defense in bar of the action. It must be pleaded in abatement. — 1 Chit. PI. 464, and note; 2 ib. 14 and note, and 406. And under our liberal system of amendments, if this defense had been properly interposed, an amendment by introducing a next friend would have been allowable.

Affirmed.

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

Howland v. Wallace, 81 Ala. 238 (Ala. 1886).

81 Ala. 238 (Howland v. Wallace) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Crenshaw v. Alabama Freight, Inc.
252 So. 2d 33 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1971)
Sovereign Camp, W. O. W. v. Gunn
158 So. 192 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1934)
Upshaw v. Eubank
151 So. 837 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
Maness v. Woodall
148 So. 744 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
Wyrosdick v. Age-Herald Pub. Co.
117 So. 28 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1928)
City of Albany v. Wilson
112 So. 435 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1927)
Smith v. Yearwood
73 So. 384 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1916)
Savage v. Smith
31 So. 374 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1902)
Kansas City, Memphis & Birmingham Railroad v. Crocker
95 Ala. 412 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1891)