Sovereign Camp, W. O. W. v. Daniel
153 So. 918, 228 Ala. 699
Opinion
The undisputed facts of this ease show that it is controlled by our cases of Higgins v. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W., 224 Ala. 644, 141 So. 562; Sovereign Camp, W. O. W., v. Batty, 227 Ala. 50, 148 So. 811; Sovereign Camp, W. O. W., v. Harden, 227 Ala. 700, 150 So. 921.
No ruling assigned by appellant was prejudicial when so considered. The judgment is affirmed on the authority of those eases.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sovereign Camp, W. O. W. v. Daniel, 153 So. 918, 228 Ala. 699 (Ala. 1934).
153 So. 918 (Sovereign Camp, W. O. W. v. Daniel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
De Almada v. Sovereign Camp of the Woodmen of the World
67 P.2d 474 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1937)