History
  • No items yet
midpage
Porter v. Burleson & Davis
38 Ala. 343
Ala.
1862
Check Treatment
A. J. WALKER, C. J.

The action in this case was not “founded on any instrument of writing ascertaining the plaintiffs demand.” The rendering of a" judgment final, without th'e intervention of a jury, was not authorized by the statute ; and, upon a principle -repeatedly announced in this court, such action on the part of the court below was erroneous.^Code, § 2366 , Moreland v. Ruffin, Minor, 18 ; Philips v. Malone, ib. 110 ; Byrne v. Harris, ib. 286 ; Petigrew v. Petigrew, 1 Stew. 850 ; Chapman v. Arrington, 3 Stew. 480; Kennon v. McRae, 3 St. & P. 249 ; Amason v. Nash, 24 Ala., 279; Beville v. Reese, 25 Ala. 451; Connoly v. Ala. & Tenn. Rivers Railroad Co., 29 Ala. 373.

Reversed and remanded..

Case Details

Case Name: Porter v. Burleson & Davis
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Jan 15, 1862
Citation: 38 Ala. 343
Court Abbreviation: Ala.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.