From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Hayes

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 22, 1918
77 So. 915 (Ala. Crim. App. 1918)

Opinion

8 Div. 440.

January 22, 1918.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lawrence County; R.C. Brickell, Judge.

Action by J.W. Williams against James R. Hayes. From a judgment for plaintiff for nominal damages, he appeals. Reversed and remanded.

G.O. Chenault, of Albany, and P.M. Brindley, of Hartselle, for appellant. W.P. Chitwood, of Moulton, for appellee.


The first count of the complaint is in trespass for false imprisonment, and the second in case for malicious prosecution. The case was tried in the court below on the assumption that the process under which plaintiff was arrested and tried was void, under a decision of the Supreme Court, not cited by either of the parties in brief, and we will treat the case on the same theory.

The plaintiff recovered nominal damages, and from the judgment on the verdict of the jury appeals.

During the progress of the trial, the plaintiff offered evidence to show that by reason of his arrest and prosecution he incurred expense in the employment of counsel to protect him against the unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution, and the court sustained an objection interposed by the defendant to this evidence, and correctly so, because such damages were not specially claimed in the complaint.

As soon as this ruling was announced, the plaintiff asked leave of court to amend the complaint so as to specially claim such damages, and the court declined to allow the amendment, and in this ruling committed reversible error. Fields v. Karter, 121 Ala. 329, 25 So. 800; Springfield Fire Ins. Co. v. De Jarnett, 111 Ala. 248, 19 So. 995; Boshell v. Cunningham, 200 Ala. 579, 76 So. 937.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Williams v. Hayes

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 22, 1918
77 So. 915 (Ala. Crim. App. 1918)
Case details for

Williams v. Hayes

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAMS v. HAYES

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Jan 22, 1918

Citations

77 So. 915 (Ala. Crim. App. 1918)
77 So. 915

Citing Cases

Chapman v. Powers

In note 95, 17 C.J. 1018, there are cited the decisions of twelve states holding that medical bills must be…

Birmingham Electric Co. v. Glenn

There was no error in allowing the amendment. Birmingham Elec. Co. v. Mealing, 214 Ala. 597, 108 So. 511;…