Woodward Iron Co. v. Collins

Supreme Court of Alabama

Woodward Iron Co. v. Collins

76 So. 911, 200 Ala. 553, 1917 Ala. LEXIS 527

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedNovember 15, 1917

Docket6 Div. 634.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 76 So. 911 (Woodward Iron Co. v. Collins) 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

Woodward Iron Co. v. Collins, 76 So. 911, 200 Ala. 553, 1917 Ala. LEXIS 527 (Ala. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

ANDERSON, C. J.

[1] The letter from the plaintiff to Duffie was merely incidental or collateral to the real issue in the case and there was no- error in permitting proof of same by the copy instead of the original. Moreover, there was no serious conflict in the evidence as to the contents of same or a denial of the receipt of same. M., J. & K. C. R. R. v. Hawkins, 163 Ala. 582, 51 South. 37; Costello v. State, 130 Ala. 143, 30 South. 376; Cobb v. State, 100 Ala. 19, 14 South. 362.

[2] The trial court will not be reversed for refusing the defendant’s requested charge which we designate A. Whether good or not it was, in effect, covered by the oral charge of the court. The oral charge instructed the jury specifically as to the elements of damages that could be awarded the .plaintiff in case of recovery, and omitted damages resulting from lost time; thus, in effect, excluding the same. Acts 1915, p. 815.

The judgment of the city court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

MAYFIELD, SOMERVILLE, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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