Louisville N. R. Co. v. Holmes
89 So. 610, 206 Ala. 304, 1921 Ala. LEXIS 124
This text of 89 So. 610 (Louisville N. R. Co. v. Holmes) 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
Louisville N. R. Co. v. Holmes, 89 So. 610, 206 Ala. 304, 1921 Ala. LEXIS 124 (Ala. 1921).
Opinions
The decisions in Missouri Pacific R. Co. et al. v. Ault (No. 252, June 1, 1921), 256 U. S. 554, 41 Sup. Ct. 593, 65 L. Ed. -, and Charlton v. A. G. S., 89 South. 710, 1 demonstrate that appellant had a complete and adequate remedy at law.
The decree of the circuit court, in equity, is affirmed.
Affirmed.
1
Post, p. 341.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Finnell v. Pitts
132 So. 2 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1930)
Davis v. Dawkins
95 So. 188 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1922)
Charlton v. Alabama Great Southern R. Co.
89 So. 710 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1921)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
89 So. 610, 206 Ala. 304, 1921 Ala. LEXIS 124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/louisville-n-r-co-v-holmes-ala-1921.