J. R. Watkins Co. v. Turberville
This text of 198 So. 847 (J. R. Watkins Co. v. Turberville) 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
Appellant brought this suit against the appellees as guarantors for the performance of a certain written contract entered into between appellant and one William W. McNeil.
As a defense to the suit defendants interposed plea “A”, which appears in the report of the case. This plea was rested upon the fraudulent misrepresentations on the part of the principal obligor. But the plea fails to aver that plaintiff, the- guarantee, participated in or had any knowledge of any such alleged fraudulent representations.
Apt grounds of demurrer take the point, and under the decisions of this court (J. R. Watkins Medicine Co. v. Hargett, 209 Ala. 165, 95 So. 811; Furst & Thomas v. Sandlin, 208 Ala. 490, 94 So. 740; J. R. Watkins Co. v. Daniel, 228 Ala. 399, 153 So. 771) in harmony with-the current of authority elsewhere (71 A.L.R. 1278 et seq.; 28 C. J. 927) the demurrer was due to be sustained.
The action of the court in overruling the demurrer to plea “A” superinduced the nonsuit and was error to reverse. In view of that conclusion a consideration of the ruling on plaintiff’s replication becomes-unnecessary.
For the error indicated let the judgment stand reversed.
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
198 So. 847, 240 Ala. 283, 1940 Ala. LEXIS 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-r-watkins-co-v-turberville-ala-1940.