Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

204 Ala. 192

85 So 461

Bickley v. Murdock

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 15, 1920

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1920-04-15

Brickell, Judge. Assumpsit by A. J. Murdock against W. H. Bickley to recover commissions on the sale of real property. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Transferred from Court of Appeals under Acts. 1911, p. 450, § 6. The facts sufficiently appear from the opinion of the court. Counsel discuss the evidence, with the insistence that the court rendered an improper judgment; but they cite no authorities in support of same.

Relies on Hackett v. Cash · Andrews v. Grey · Finney v. Studebaker Corp. of America

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1920-04-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 1954

1 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

601920193019401950decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

THOMAS, J.

¶1 The suit was for commissions on sales of real property. The judgment was for plaintiff. No question of law is presented. The decision must rest on a question of fact. The record shows that the witnesses were examined orally before the court, and the judge had the benefit of observing their- manner and demeanor and the better opportunity to pass upon the credibility of the testimony. His finding has the force of a verdict by a jury. Hackett v. Cash, 196 Ala. 403, 72 South. 52; Finney v. Studebaker Corp., 196 Ala. 422, 72 South. 54; Andrews v. Grey, 74 South. 62; 1 Cole v. A. G. S. R. R. Co., 201 Ala. 193, 77 South. 719; Veid v. Roberts, 200 Ala. 576, 76 South. 934; Ray v. Watkins, 203 Ala. 683, 85 South. 25.

¶2 The court had the witnesses before him, and after hearing and considering their testimony found that plaintiff had brought' about the sales in question and was entitled to the commissions in the sum indicated. There are tendencies of the evidence to support such judgment. Having examined the record,- we are of opinion that the judgment rendered should be affirmed.

¶3 Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and MeCLELLAN and SOMERVILLE, JJ., concur.
/204/ala/192 · .json · Public domain