From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harrell v. Hooks

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Nov 12, 1918
80 So. 145 (Ala. Crim. App. 1918)

Opinion

1 Div. 268.

November 12, 1918.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Washington County; Ben D. Turner, Judge.

Action between C. Eugene Harrell and Mrs. Ella E. Hooks, as executrix. Judgment in favor of the latter, and the former appeals. Affirmed.

Granade Granade, of Chatom, for appellant.

W.D. Dunn, of Grove Hill, and Armbrecht, McMillan Caffey, and Gordon Edington, all of Mobile, for appellee.


On a previous day at the last term of this court, in response to a motion of appellee, the bill of exceptions in this case was stricken. All errors assigned, having reference to matters to be shown by the bill of exceptions, are concluded.

Several errors are assigned on the record, as to rulings on demurrers to pleas; but in view of the fact that there is no bill of exceptions, and assuming, without so deciding, that the court did err in the particulars named, it is not made to appear that the error was prejudicial to appellant. This is necessary under Supreme Court rule 45 (175 Ala. xxi, 61 South. ix).

Injury is no longer presumed. Wilson v. Owens Horse Mule Co., 14 Ala. App. 467, 70 So. 956.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Harrell v. Hooks

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Nov 12, 1918
80 So. 145 (Ala. Crim. App. 1918)
Case details for

Harrell v. Hooks

Case Details

Full title:HARRELL v. HOOKS

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Nov 12, 1918

Citations

80 So. 145 (Ala. Crim. App. 1918)
80 So. 145

Citing Cases

Daniel v. Ormand

The same presumption would be indulged as to no evidence being offered in support of any of defendant's…

Vines v. Buck

The appellant having failed and refused to state his case to the jury, or to put on evidence, authorized the…