TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bell v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen

Bell v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen.

Bell v. Bhd. of R.R. Trainmen, 107 So. 810 (Ala. 1926)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Alabama · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 25, 1926
Docket
No. 6 Div. 489.
Judges
Anderson, Somerville, Thomas, Bouldin
Citations
107 So. 810214 Ala. 3021926 Ala. LEXIS 223

Opinion of the Court — Anderson

ANDERSON, C. J.

This case comes here upon the record proper; there being no bill of exceptions, notwithstanding there was a judgment for the defendant. The trial court sustained the demurrers to many of the counts, and, whether properly so'or not, this action was without injury to the plaintiff, as he got the full benefit of these counts under count I and amended count D, to which the demurrer was overruled as these counts in varying form and language state the identical cause of action as the counts that were eliminated. Indeed, count I perhaps required less proof to establish the cause of action than some of the counts that were put out of the ease and no more than any of them as to material facts. Counsel for the appellant, in his brief, proceeds upon the idea that the demurrer was sustained as to count I, but the 'judgment entry shows that the demurrer was overruled.

Appellant complains that the trial court erred in overruling his demurrer to many of the special pleas. It is sufficient to say that it does not appear that plaintiff sustained any injury as to this ruling. The general issue was pleaded, and, from aught appearing, the plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case, and the trial court may have found for the defendant for this reason. Andrews v. Hall, 31 So. 356 , 132 Ala. 320 ; Vines v. Buck, 93 So. 398 , 207 Ala. 523 , and cases there cited.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1926: 11936: 11944: 11962: 119262026peak 1926 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Himes v. Masonic Mut. Life Ass'n of District of Columbia110 So. 133 (Ala. 1926)
  2. Kiker v. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W.167 So. 313 (Ala. 1936)
  3. Dantzler v. Bagby Elevator and Electric Company136 So. 2d 894 (Ala. 1962)
  4. Silverfield v. Globe Indemnity Co.19 So. 2d 76 (Ala. Ct. App. 1944)

Most recent

  1. Dantzler v. Bagby Elevator and Electric Company136 So. 2d 894 (Ala. 1962)
  2. Silverfield v. Globe Indemnity Co.19 So. 2d 76 (Ala. Ct. App. 1944)
  3. Kiker v. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W.167 So. 313 (Ala. 1936)
  4. Himes v. Masonic Mut. Life Ass'n of District of Columbia110 So. 133 (Ala. 1926)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Andrews v. Hall, 31 So. 356 (Ala. 1902) 14
Vines v. Buck, 93 So. 398 (Ala. 1922) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list