Porter v. Burleson & Davis
Opinion
A. J. WALKER, C. J.
The action in this case was not “founded on any instrument of writing ascertaining the plaintiffs demand.” The rendering of a" judgment final, without th'e intervention of a jury, was not authorized by the statute ; and, upon a principle -repeatedly announced in this court, such action on the part of the court below was erroneous.^Code, § 2366 , Moreland v. Ruffin, Minor, 18 ; Philips v. Malone, ib. 110 ; Byrne v. Harris, ib. 286 ; Petigrew v. Petigrew, 1 Stew. 850 ; Chapman v. Arrington, 3 Stew. 480; Kennon v. McRae, 3 St. & P. 249 ; Amason v. Nash, 24 Ala., 279; Beville v. Reese, 25 Ala. 451; Connoly v. Ala. & Tenn. Rivers Railroad Co., 29 Ala. 373.
Reversed and remanded..
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
38 Ala. 343 (Porter v. Burleson & Davis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.