Rice v. Tuscaloosa County

198 So. 245, 240 Ala. 4, 1940 Ala. LEXIS 205
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided January 25, 1940·No. 6 Div. 602.·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

PER -CURIAM.

Upon consideration of this cause in consultation, the Court concludes that the judgment of the court below is due to be affirmed, both upon application of our non-claim statute, Code 1923, § 228, and upon the principle of law applicable to voluntary payments. The Court deems unnecessary a discussion of these questions further than to state disagreement with the theories set forth in the dissenting opinion, which take this case from without the influence of said- non-claim statute and the principle applicable to voluntary payment of money.

The judgment is accordingly here affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and THOMAS, BOULDIN, BROWN, and KNIGHT, JJ„ concur. GARDNER and FOSTER, JJ., dissent.

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

Rice v. Tuscaloosa County, 198 So. 245, 240 Ala. 4, 1940 Ala. LEXIS 205 (Ala. 1940).

198 So. 245 (Rice v. Tuscaloosa County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Adams v. Smith
153 So. 2d 221 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1963)
Deal v. Tuscaloosa County
45 So. 2d 691 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1950)
Rice v. Tuscaloosa County
4 So. 2d 497 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1941)