John v. Birmingham Realty Co.

55 So. 801, 172 Ala. 603, 1911 Ala. LEXIS 231
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJune 16, 1911
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 55 So. 801 (John v. Birmingham Realty Co.) 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.

Bluebook
John v. Birmingham Realty Co., 55 So. 801, 172 Ala. 603, 1911 Ala. LEXIS 231 (Ala. 1911).

Opinion

ANDERSON, J.

While the general affirmative charge should never be given whenever there is any evidence or a reasonable inference in opposition to same, yet the inference must he reasonable, and not merely conjectural or imaginary, and unless it is reasonable the giving of said charge is warranted.

The only theory upon which the plaintiff could recover in this case is upon proof, positive or circumstantial, that the caps found by him were placed or [605]*605left there by the defendants, or their agents or servants. There was proof that one of the defendants (Watkins) had snch caps in his commissary, bnt no proof that he was the only person in that section who had or handled snch caps; and the fact that they were found near a tent in which was kept cement, sand, and tools, not shown to have been carried there from the commissary, was not sufficient to create even a reasonable inference that they belonged to or were carried there by Watkins or his servants. True, such caps are used in blasting, and the defendants were engaged in blasting; but the evidence shows that they did not use caps and fuse in doing so. On the other hand, there was proof of constant blasting in a mine or mines near there, by the use of caps and fuse, and that the miners were daily passing in the vicinity of Lilly street. It was also shown that other commissaries in. the neighborhood kept cartridges used in blasting, and it is just as reasonable to infer that the cartridges were dropped by miners, or came out of other commissaries, as it is to infer that they belonged to Watkins, and got to the place where the plaintiff found them through the negligence of said Watkins or his agents or servants.

The trial court did not err in giving the general charge requested by the defendants, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Simpson, Sayre, and Somerville, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Alabama Power Co. v. Foster
555 So. 2d 174 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1989)
Evans v. Alabama Power Co.
474 So. 2d 1102 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1985)
Fidelity Service Ins. Co. v. Jones
191 So. 2d 20 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1966)
Southeast Alabama Gas District v. Killingsworth
175 So. 2d 741 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1965)
Bankers Fire & Marine Insurance v. Contractors Equipment Rental Co.
159 So. 2d 198 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1963)
McClinton v. McClinton
63 So. 2d 594 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1952)
Spurlock v. J. T. Knight & Son, Inc.
13 So. 2d 396 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1943)
Batson v. Birmingham Trust & Savings Co.
4 So. 2d 307 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1941)
New York Life Ins. Co. v. Torrance
153 So. 463 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
City of Birmingham v. Whitworth
119 So. 841 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)
Eves v. Littig Construction Co.
212 N.W. 154 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1927)
Liverpool London Globe Ins. Co. v. McCree
105 So. 901 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1925)
Southern Ry. Co. v. Dickson
100 So. 665 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924)
Naftel Dry Goods Co. v. Mitchell
95 So. 32 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1923)
Alabama Power Co. v. Armour & Co.
92 So. 111 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1921)
Ingram Land Co. v. Tubb
89 So. 827 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1921)
Armour & Co. v. Alabama Power Co.
84 So. 628 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1919)
J. M. Card Lumber Co. v. Reed
80 So. 404 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1918)
Birmingham Southern R. Co. v. Guest
77 So. 241 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
55 So. 801, 172 Ala. 603, 1911 Ala. LEXIS 231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-v-birmingham-realty-co-ala-1911.