Smith v. Flagg

Supreme Court of Alabama

Smith v. Flagg

46 Ala. 624

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedJune 15, 1871

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 46 Ala. 624 (Smith v. Flagg) 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

Smith v. Flagg, 46 Ala. 624 (Ala. 1871).

Pincite

Opinion

B, E. SAEEOLD, J.

In a suit for damages for the breach of a warranty of a horse, the testimony of a witness, who was one of the plaintiffs, that his co-plaintiff and partner told him on his return home with the horse which he had purchased, that the defendant had warranted him to be sound, the defendant not being present, is inadmissible, because it is mere hearsay relating to a past transaction. Martin vs. Hardesty, 27 Ala. 458.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

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

B, E. SAEEOLD, J.

In a suit for damages for the breach of a warranty of a horse, the testimony of a witness, who was one of the plaintiffs, that his co-plaintiff and partner told him on his return home with the horse which he had purchased, that the defendant had warranted him to be sound, the defendant not being present, is inadmissible, because it is mere hearsay relating to a past transaction. Martin vs. Hardesty, 27 Ala. 458.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 Ala. 624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-flagg-ala-1871.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack