O'Neal v. Simonton

109 Ala. 167
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 15, 1895
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 109 Ala. 167 (O'Neal v. Simonton) 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
O'Neal v. Simonton, 109 Ala. 167 (Ala. 1895).

Opinion

COLEMAN, J.

The appellee, Simonton, sued to recover damages for trespass' to reality. After verdict for plaintiff, the defendant moved in arrest of judgment, that ‘ ‘the pomplaint failed to set forth and contain a substantial cause of action, in that it failed to allege the plaintiff was in possession of the property at the time of the alleged trespass.” According to the form prescribed by statue tor trespass to land, it is only necessary to aver that the land belonged to the plaintiff. If the plaintiff does not rely upon ownership, but possession merely, to sustain the action, the averment of possession is neccessary and will be sufficient as a complaint. Code of 1886, p. 795. The complaint is sufficient to support a judgment, and when this is the case, a motion in arrest of judgment after verdict will not be granted, although the complaint may have been subject to demurrer properly filed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Foust v. Kinney
80 So. 474 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1918)
North Birmingham Trust & Savings Bank v. Adams
63 So. 1022 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1913)
McGowin v. Dickson
62 So. 685 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1913)
Turnipseed v. Burton
58 So. 959 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1912)
Cochran v. Brannan
196 F. 219 (S.D. Alabama, 1912)
Elmore v. Fields
45 So. 66 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
109 Ala. 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oneal-v-simonton-ala-1895.