Putman v. Williams

150 So. 702, 227 Ala. 428, 1933 Ala. LEXIS 314
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 2, 1933
Docket8 Div. 543.
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 150 So. 702 (Putman v. Williams) 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
Putman v. Williams, 150 So. 702, 227 Ala. 428, 1933 Ala. LEXIS 314 (Ala. 1933).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Regardless of the correctness of the opinion of the Court of Appeals in holding that the trial court did not err in declining to let the claimant amend' his claim so as to strike therefrom the “three barrels of corn,” the petition, opinion, and record clearly show that the petitioner was not thereby damaged. Had the amendment been allowed, the three barrels of corn would have been liable to the lilaintiff’s execution, and the claim bond would have been liable therefor, and the judgment rendered was to the' same effect. Courts should not he called upon to do vain and useless things.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. J., and GARDNER, FOSTER and KNIGHT, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Watkins v. City of Dothan
109 So. 2d 671 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1959)
Ex Parte Watkins
109 So. 2d 671 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 So. 702, 227 Ala. 428, 1933 Ala. LEXIS 314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/putman-v-williams-ala-1933.