86 Ala. 332
Decided December 15, 1888
Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1888-12-15
Tried before the Hon. Jesse M. Carmichael. The facts of this case are substantially the same as on the former appeal. — King v. Paulk, 85 Ala. 186. The charge of the court was in favor of the plaintiff, and that charge is assigned as error.
Relies on King v. Paulk · Fitzgerald v. Williamson
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1888-12-15
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 1931
6 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 →
¶1This case was brought to this court by appeal at the last term. The only question raised by the present record was then decided. Upon remandment of the cause, the Circuit Court followed the rulings of this court in giving the charge requested by the plaintiff. This being the only error assigned by the appellant, the judgment is *333affirmed on the authority of King v. Paulk, 85 Ala. 186; Fitzgerald v. Williamson, 85 Ala. 585, and cases cited.
¶2Affirmed.