46 Ala. 624
Decided June 15, 1871
Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1871-06-15
Tried before Hon. E. M. Keils. This was an action brought by appellees against appellant to recover damages for the breach of a warranty of soundness of a horse sold by appellant to appellees.
Relies on Martin v. Hardesty
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1871-06-15
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1953
3 state decisions
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 →
¶1In a suit for damages for the breach of a warranty of a horse, the testimony of a witness, who was one of the plaintiffs, that his co-plaintiff and partner told him on his return home with the horse which he had purchased, that the defendant had warranted him to be sound, the defendant not being present, is inadmissible, because it is mere hearsay relating to a past transaction. Martin vs. Hardesty, 27 Ala. 458.
¶2The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.