Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

119 Ala. 461

Little v. Smith

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided July 1, 1898

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1898-07-01

Tried before Hon. T. J. Burton. The appellant, as landlord, sued by attachment upon an alleged account for rent and advances due from the appellee, as tenant.

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently November 1914

4 state decisions

Relies on Woodrow v. Hawving

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1898-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

McCLELLAN, J.

¶1This is an appeal from a judgment rendered by the judge of the county court under special statutory provisions sitting without a jury. The complaint contains two counts, one on an open account and the other on an account stated. It cannot be maintained with any force and is not attempted to be that the evidence furnishes sufficient data for judgment for plaintiff, Little, on an open account.

¶2As to whether there was ever a stated account between the parties the evidence is oral and in direct conflict. Under these circumstances, and in recognition of *463the principles declared in Woodrow v. Hawving, 105 Ala. 240, and many times reaffirmed, we must concur in tbe conclusion of tbe trial judge that no stated account was proved.

¶3It is unnecessary to pass upon tbe court’s rulings on tbe admissibility of testimony. They relate.to evidence received against plaintiff’s objection. If tbe testimony objected to was inadmissible it was solely on tbe grounds of irrelevancy and immateriality, and it was in fact so irrelevant and immaterial that tbe court could not bave been influenced by it.

¶4Affirmed.

/119/ala/461 · .json · Public domain