Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

74 Ala. 485

Perry v. Danner & Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 15, 1883

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1883-12-15

Tried before the Hon. ¥i. E. Clarke. This action, with several others (which were consolidated), was brought by N. W. Perry, against the persons composing the firm of A. C. Danner & Co.; and in the complaint filed in the Circuit Court, the plaintiff claimed $62, alleged to be due by account on the 1st June, 1882, and on account stated on that day, “ and for storage room by plaintiff made and provided in and about the storing and keeping of certain goods and chattels, stored…

Relies on Vincent v. Rogers · Rogers's Administrator v. Jones · Mathis v. Oates

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1883-12-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently August 1954

5 state decisions

2018831890190019101920193019401950decided

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 →

SOMERYILLE, J.

¶1— It may now be considered as the settled construction of section 3112 of the present Code (1876),. *487that when a voluntary nonsuit is taken by a plaintiff, under its provisions, in consequence of an adverse ruling on demurrer, such ruling on demurrer can not be reviewed in this court under this section, which is identical with section 2759 of the Revised Code of 1867. — Mathis v. Oates, 57 Ala. 112, and cases cited. Decisions upon pleadings, which are matters of record, and not the subject of a bill of exceptions, are not revisable undér this statute. — Rogers v. Jones, 51 Ala. 353; Vincent v. Rogers, 30 Ala. 471.

¶2"We can not see that the court erred in excluding the evidence alleged to have been offered by the appellant, in support of the averments of the complaint. The record fails to show what was the nature or character of this evidence. Nor is it even stated that it was either relevant or material to the issue in dispute, or that it was not mere hearsay. We are not authorized to assume any of these facts, in order to pot the court below in the attitude of making an erroneous ruling. The judgment must be presumed to be free from, error, unless the record affirmatively shows the contrary.

¶3Affirmed.

/74/ala/485 · .json · Public domain