Smith v. Roebuck

46 So. 455, 155 Ala. 395, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 274
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedApril 27, 1908
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 46 So. 455 (Smith v. Roebuck) 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. Roebuck, 46 So. 455, 155 Ala. 395, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 274 (Ala. 1908).

Opinion

TYSON, C. J.

The second count of the complaint upon which this case was tried clearly states a substantial cause of action. — Kelly v. Moore, 51 Ala. 364.

The three special pleas (numbered 3, 4, and 5), attempting to invoke the defense of justification on the part of the justice of the peace against whom the wrongs are charged in the count, are wholly defective, in failing to aver his jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the person of the defendant. — Heard v. Harris, 68 Ala. 43; Busteed v. Parsons, 54 Ala. 401, 25 Am. [399]*399Rep. 688; Craig v. Burness, 32 Ala. 731; 19 Cyc. pp. 361,- 362. The fourth and fifth are also defective in another particular :• They fail to identify the act relied on as a justification with the wrongs counted on for a recovery. 8 Ency. PI. & Pr. p. 850. The demurrer to each of the pleas should have been sustained.

Reversed and remanded.

Dowdell, Anderson, and McClellan, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Deason v. Gray
69 So. 15 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 So. 455, 155 Ala. 395, 1908 Ala. LEXIS 274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-roebuck-ala-1908.