Putman v. Williams

150 So. 702, 227 Ala. 428, 1933 Ala. LEXIS 314
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 2, 1933·No. 8 Div. 543.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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

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

150 So. 702 (Putman v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)