ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

I

INDEX-DIGEST

KEY NUMBER SYSTEM

THIS IS A KEY-NUMBER INDEX

It Supplements the Decennial Digests, the Key-Number Series and Prior Re-
porter Volume Index-Digests.

ABATEMENT AND REVIVAL.

ADJOINING LANDOWNERS.

III. DEFECTS AND

OBJECTIONS AS TO See Boundaries.

PARTIES AND PROCEEDINGS.

ADMINISTRATION.

ADMIRALTY.

[blocks in formation]

OF See Shipping.

TITLE, RIGHT, INTEREST, OR

1. JURISDICTION.

37 (Miss.) Bank entitled to prosecute ac-
tion to judgment on merger with other bank See Executors and Administrators.
pending suit.-Central Nat. Bank v. Perry, 276.

TRANSFER OR

LIABILITY.

47 (Miss.) Actions, against former Direc-21 (Ala.) Employee held engaged in non-
maritime service when injured.-Ex parte
tor General held not to abate, because not re-
vived.-Moore v. Hines, 392.
Havard, 897.

ACCORD AND SATISFACTION.

See Compromise and Settlement.

(Ala.) Creditor's acceptance of notes
from third party held not accord or satisfac-
tion.-Tuscaloosa Lumber Co. v. Tropical Paint
& Oil Co., 236.

ACCOUNT, ACTION ON.

(Ala.) Bookkeeper's affidavit held suffi-
cient to render account admissible.-Farrell v.
Anderson-Dulin-Varnell Co., 205.

ACTION.

See Abatement and Revival; Dismissal and
Nonsuit.

II. NATURE AND FORM.

31 (Ala.) Assumpsit for cutting and re-
moving timber not maintainable without aver-
ring sale.-Cox v. Awtry, 337.

III. JOINDER, SPLITTING, CONSOLIDA-
TION, AND SEVERANCE.

[blocks in formation]

13 (Ala.) Claimant must bring possession
within specification of Code.-Earnest v. Fite,
637.

Code requirements held not to apply to claim
by prescription of 20 years.-Id.

(F) Hostile Character of Possession.
71(1) (La.) Prescription; sale under pri-
vate signature held sufficient basis for claim of
title by prescription.-Kinchen v. Redmond,
607.
81 (La.) Prescription; unauthorized deed
held sufficient to support prescription acqui-
rendi causa.-Bowers v. Langston, 301.

85(5) (La.) Prescription; proof of con-
tents of lost document evidencing sale of land
held sufficient to support plea of title by pre-
scription.-Kinchen v. Redmond, 607.

AGENCY.

38(3) (Ala.) Complaint in trespass held
not demurrable for misjoinder of causes of ac- See Principal and Agent.
tion.-Alabama Power Co. v. Cornelius, 207.

47 (Ala.) Complaint held demurrable for
misjoinder of actions.-Cox v. Awtry, 337.

50(1) (Ala.) No misjoinder of causes of
action because suit brought on several injunc-
tion bonds.-McCord v. Bridges, 469.

50(9) (La.) Joinder of individual defend-
ants and insurance companies in suit for dam-
ages for slander and libel held improper.-Mc-
Gee v. Collins, 430.

Defendants sued for conspiracy held to have
sufficient community of interest to be joined
in one suit.-Id.

IV. COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION,
AND TERMINATION.

70 (La.) Plea of prescription and prayer
for dismissal held to waive abandonment of suit
for want of prosecution.-Continental Supply
Co. v. Fisher Oil Co., 64.

Demand in reconvention by plaintiff in an-
swer to demand in nullity held reinstitution of
suit as against claim of abandonment.-Id.

100 SO.-59

AGRICULTURE.

7 (Fla.) Rules of pleading applicable to
vendors of fertilizers.-Davis v. American Agr.
Chemical Co., 741.

1 (La.) Borrower of money to make crop
held not entitled to sell in violation of con-
tract.-Gueydan v. T. P. Ranch Co., 541.

ALTERATION OF INSTRUMENTS.

2 (Miss.) Alteration which enlarges scope
of instrument as means of evidence is material
alteration.-J. R. Watkins Co. v. Fornea, 185.

9 (Ala.) Detachment of draft pasted to
draft for larger amount held not material "al-
teration."-Moore v. First Nat. Bank, 349.

17 (Ala.) Unauthorized alteration in tim-
ber grant held not to authorize cancellation of
conveyance.-Gresham v. Pogue, 636.
ANIMALS.

See Railroads, 439-443.

(929)

50 (2) (Ala.) Facts to support establish-
ment of stock law district presumed.-March v.
Board of Revenue & Road Com'rs of Mobile
County, 822.

Petition for stock law election held insuffi-
cient. Id.

Proceedings for stock law election held valid.

-Id.

Withdrawal and refiling of petition for stock
law election within court's discretion.-Id.

50(2) (Ala.) Previous act relative to stock
law districts held`repealed.—Board of Revenue
v. Ikner, 827.

APPEAL AND ERROR.

216(2) (Ala.) Instruction as to verdict
where mind in state of confusion held not re-
versible error.-Boyette v. Bradley, 647.

226(1) (Ala.) Failure to render judgment
for costs not to be raised for first time in ap-
pellate court.-Richardson v. Stinson, 209.

242(3) (Ala.) Demurrers not ruled on not
reviewable.-Thompson v. Menefee, 107.

(D) Motions for New Trial.

301 (Ala.) Prejudicial effect of question
assuming unproved fact to be reviewed must
be presented by motion for new trial.-South-
ern Ry. Co. v. Dickson, 665.

305 (Ala.App.) Excessiveness of verdict
not reviewable on appeal from judgment with-
out exception to denial of new trial.-Cheek v.
Odom, 782.
VI. PARTIES.

See Certiorari; Courts, 203-231; Crim-
inal Law, 1036-1188; Exceptions, Bill of.
For review of rulings in particular actions or
proceedings, see also the various specific top-327 (2) (La.) Defendant not
ics.

II. NATURE AND GROUNDS OF APPEL-

LATE JURISDICTION.

21 (Ala.) Jurisdiction to consider appeal
from decree not final, may not be conferred by
consent.-Jackson v. Jackson, 332.

III. DECISIONS REVIEWABLE.
(D) Finality of Determination.
68 (Fla.) "Interlocutory orders or decrees"
defined.-Theo. Hirsch Co. v. Scott, 157.

necessary
party below held not necessary party on ap-
peal by plaintiff.-Givens v. De Soto Bldg. Co.,
534.

327 (4) (Fla.) Receiver may be made sole
appellee in appeal from order fixing his com-
pensation.-Theo. Hirsch Co. v. Scott, 157.

329 (Fla.) Interveners may be brought into
court on appeal, when final decision of their
right or claim made below.-Theo. Hirsch Co.
v. Scott, 157.

VII. REQUISITES AND PROCEEDINGS
FOR TRANSFER OF CAUSE.

(A) Time of Taking Proceedings.

69(1) (Ala.) Interlocutory decree allow-
ing alimony and counsel fees pendente lite will
not support appeal.-Jackson v. Jackson, 332.339 (4) (Ala.) Appeal from preliminary in-
71(2) (Fla.) Writ of error lies from or- junction lies if taken within ten days.-Malone
der dissolving ancillary attachment.-Maddox v. Decatur Cotton Compress Co., 807.
Grocery Co. v. Hay, 747.

76 (2) (Ala.) Opinion in decree stating re-
lationship not followed by order or decree not
final, supporting appeal.-Hill v. Hill, 340.

82(1) (Fla.) Matters arising after final
appealable judgments or decrees requiring judi-
cial action relative to rights litigated in main
suit appealable.-Theo. Hirsch Co. v. Scott,

157.

Subsequent decree requiring judicial action
on matters arising after final decree review-
able.-Id.

Order in orginal proceeding collateral to main
action appealable; "final order."-Id.

(F) Mode of Rendition, Form, and Entry

of Judgment or Order.

133 (Fla.) Order for final judgment, fol-
lowed by judgment for cost, will not support
writ of error.-Young v. Lassiter, 362.

IV. RIGHT OF REVIEW.

(A) Persons Entitled.

143 (Fla.) Interveners may appeal when
final decision of their right or claim made be-
low. Theo. Hirsch Co. v. Scott, 157.

150(1) (Fla.) Debtor in receivership has
appealable interest in order diverting proceeds
of his property to purposes other than extin-
guishment of his debt.-Theo. Hirsch Co. v.
Scott, 157.

V. PRESENTATION AND RESERVATION
IN LOWER COURT OF GROUNDS
OF REVIEW.

(A) Issues and Questions in Lower Court.
171(3) (Ala.) Case considered on appeal,
as it was tried.-Jefferson County v. Parker,
338.

351 (2) (Ala.) Appeal held taken within
time prescribed.-Luther v. Luther, 497.

(B) Petition or Prayer. Allowance, and

Certificate or Affidavit,

364 (Fla.) Writ of error made returnable
30 days from its date will be dismissed.-Law
v. Zimmerman, 528.

364 (Fla.) Writ of error made returnable
more than 90 days from its date will be dis-
missed.-East Coast Lumber Co. v. Walter
Walton Co., 738.

[ocr errors]

(C) Payment of Fees or Costs, and Bonds
or Other Securities.

384 (2) (Ala.App.) Appeal held to be from
original judgment and not from order denying
new trial.-Robinson v. Steverson, 910.

X. RECORD AND PROCEEDINGS NOT IN

RECORD.

(A) Matters to be Shown by Record.
494 (Ala.) Ruling on motion for new trial
not reviewable unless judgment thereon shown;
showing held sufficient.-May v. Middleton, 640.

508 (Miss.) Dismissal of appeal by circuit
court affirmed because no appeal bond in rec-
ord showing appeal to circuit court.-Michael
v. West Hatchie Drainage Dist., 392.

515(2) (Ala.) Decree reversed for absence
from record of note of testimony.-Conner v.
State, 474.

Decree denying complainants relief will not
be reversed on account of nonexistence of note
of testimony.-Id.

(B) Scope and Contents of Record.
536 (Ala.) Settlement and signing of bill
of exceptions judicial act and must take place
within territorial limits of judge's jurisdiction.

179(4) (Ala.) Only constitutional infirm-
ities of statutes raised and insisted on by par--Luther v. Luther, 497.
ties considered.-Faircloth-Segrest Mercantile 537 (Ala.App.) Bill of exceptions not pre-
Co. v. Roach, 908.

[blocks in formation]

194(1) (Ala.) Plea not challenged, demur-
red to, nor joined issue on not reviewable.-

sented within 90 days ineffectual to review or-
iginal judgment.-Robinson v. Steverson, 910.
(H) Transmission, Filing, Printing, and
Service of Copies.

627(2) (Ala.) Appeal held not waived or

931

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER
628 (2) (Ala.) Appellant not prejudiced by 863 (La.) Claims for attorney's fees could
failure of probate judge to discharge ministerial not be considered on appeal.-First Nat. Bank
v. Hudson Const. Co., 451.
duties.-Luther v. Luther, 497.

(1) Defects, Objections, Amendment, and
Correction.

ex

655(1) (Ala.) Supreme Court must
mero motu strike bill of exceptions not pre-
sented to judge as required by statute.-South-
ern Ry. Co. v. Williams, 203.

655(2) (Ala.) Appellee's motion to strike
matters improperly incorporated in bill of ex-
ceptions refused.-Harris v. Harris, 333.

655(2) (Ala.) Failure to set out consecu-
tively interrogatories and answer held not to
render bill subject to motions to strike.-Lucky
v. Roberts, 878.

655 (2) (Ala.App.) Bill purposely contain-
ing colloquy and questions and answers
witness not stricken.-Cheek v. Odom, 782.

(B) Interlocutory, Collateral, and Supple-
mentary Proceedings and Questions.

873 (3) (Ala.App.) Denial of new trial, not
appealed from in time, not considered on ap-
peal from original judgment.-Cheek v. Odom,
782.

(C) Parties Entitled to Allege Error.
held precluded
878(2) (La.) Defendant
from defending judgment on appeal on ground
that it was not properly cited.-G. A. Kennedy
& Bro. v. Farmers' Warehouse, 681.

(E) Presumptions.

to 900 (Ala.) Supreme Court will indulge, in
favor of things done in trial court, all pre-
sumptions not contradicted by record.-McMil-

(J) Conclusiveness and Effect. Impeach-lian Lumber Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 331.
ing and Contradicting.

668 (Ala.) That bill of exceptions was
never properly signed may be shown by parol.
-Luther v. Luther, 497.

(K) Questions Presented for Review.
to quash
677 (Ala.) Overruling motion
summons and process presumed proper, where
record discloses no evidence in support of mo-
tion.-Bailey v. Griffin, 242.

rulings, and

917(1) (La.) Facts alleged deemed true on
review of judgment sustaining exception of no
cause of action.-Dronette v. Meaux Bros., 411.
917(3) (Ala.) Grounds of demurrer, not
asserted and argued in brief, presumed waived.
-Conner v. State, 474.

920(1) (Ala.App.) Appellate court pre-
sumes, where judgment rendered by default,
that trial court correctly ruled on preliminary
motions.-Green v. NuGrape, Co., 84.

931 (1) (Ala.) Proof taken by deposition
reviewed, without presumption in favor of trial
judge's finding.-May v. State, 780.

(L) Matters Not Apparent of Record.
713(3) (Ala.) Pleadings,
charges given and refused should be incorpo-934(3) (Ala.) Face of record held to pre-
rated in record proper, not bill of exceptions.
--Harris v. Harris, 333.

XI. ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS.
719(10) (Ala.) Failure to render judgment
for costs not to be raised for first time in
appellate court without assignment of error.-
Richardson v. Stinson, 209.

[blocks in formation]

778 (Ala.) Dismissal discretionary.-Luth-
er v. Luther, 497.

792 (Ala.) Sufficiency of decree to support
appeal jurisdictional.-Jackson v. Jackson, 3:32.
797(2) (Ala.) Motion to dismiss should be
made without undue delay.-Luther v. Luther,
497.

XV. HEARING AND REHEARING.
820 (La.) Supreme Court may appoint ex-
pert to report on long and intricate accounts.
Interstate Trust & Banking Co. v. Laplace,
544.

835(2) (Miss.) Consideration of points first
made on suggestion of error optional with
court.-Mars v. Germany,

XVI. REVIEW.

(A) Scope and Extent in General.
843(4) (Ala.) Overruling of demurrers to
pleas mentioned in single assignment of error
in like rulings thereon not considered if proper
as to any.-Cooledge v. McArdle, 145.

850(1) (Ala.) Special finding of fact sub-
ject to review by Supreme Court.-Bogacki v.
City of Montgomery, 214.

863 (Ala.) Only errors affecting quantum
on plaintiff's appeal
of damages considered
insufficient.-Franklin V.
from judgment as
Argyro, 811.

clude appellate court from presuming defend-
ants' plea was filed in advance of judgment.-
McMillian Lumber Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 331.

(F) Discretion of Lower Court.
969 (Ala.) Court's refusal to transfer case
to equity side of court not reviewable.-Foun-
tain v. State, 892.

973 (Fla.) Dismissal without prejudice in
equity not error, in absence of clear showing
of abuse of discretion.-Veillard v. City of St.
Petersburg, 163.

979 (2) (Ala.) When grant of new trial
because verdict contrary to preponderance of
evidence not disturbed.-Acuff v. Lowe, 761.
979 (2) (Fla.) Order granting new trial not
disturbed where evidence conflicts and judicial
discretion not abused.-Herrin v. Avon Mfg.
Co., 174.

(G) Questions of Fact, Verdicts, and Find-

ings.

1001(1) (Miss.) Jury's finding on compe-
tent evidence not disturbed.-F. W. Woolworth
Co. v. Volking, 3.

on appeal.-
1002 (Ala.) Jury's finding of fact on con-
flicting evidence indisputable
Franklin v. Argyro, 811.

1003 (Miss.) Employee's testimony held not
so unreasonable as to warrant appellate court
in disturbing verdict.-F. W. Woolworth Co.
v. Volking, 3.

1005 (2) (Ala.) Where court not convinced
that verdict was wrong, refusal of new trial
not disturbed.-America Mining Co. v. Taylor,
1005 (3) (Ala.) Court's ruling sustaining
verdict on motion for new trial, conclusive.-
May v. Middleton, 640.

761.

1005 (3) (Ala.) Weight of conflicting evi-
dence against verdict held not ground for re-
versal.-Southern Ry. Co. v. Dickson, 665.

1008(1) (Ala.App.) Effect of findings by
court.-Dolcito Quarry Co. v. Cruse-Crawford
Mfg. Co., 72.

Appellate court will ascertain whether find-
ings sustain judgment but not whether findings
are sustained by extrinsic evidence.-Id.

1009 (1) (Ala.) Decree based on oral ex-
amination of witnesses not disturbed, unless
plainly wrong.-Driver v. Johnson, 116.

1009 (1) (Fla.) Where chancellor's decree 1050(1) (Ala.) Admission of evidence held
appears clearly erroneous, it will be reversed. not reversible error.-McCord v. Bridges, 469.
-Bankers' Financing Co. v. Dye, 804.
1050(1) (Ala.) Asking witness what day
he had a fire not prejudicial.-Atlanta & St. A.
B. R. Co. v. Spivey, 759.

1009 (4) (Ala.) Decree not set aside unless
contrary to great weight of evidence.-State v.
Brown, 224.

1050(1) (Ala.) Admission of evidence held
1009(4) (Ala.) Trial court's findings not not harmless.-America Mining Co. v. Taylor.
disturbed unless contrary to weight of evidence. 761.
-Smith v. City of Dothan, 501.
C1052 (6) (Ala.) Exclusion of testimony on
1010(1) (Ala.) Finding of neither part-issue found for appellant not reversible error.
nership nor joint adventure not disturbed in -Franklin v. Argyro, 811.
view of evidence.-Hill v. Hill, 340.

~1011(1) (Ala.App.) Findings of fact on
conflicting testimony not disturbed.-Dicks v.
McAllister, 631.

1052(8) (Ala.) Admission of testimony in-
stead of books of accounts held not prejudicial.
-Contorno v. Ensley Lumber Co., 127.

1054 (1) (Ala.) Admission of evidence of
~1011(1) (La.) Trial court's findings of fact bad reputation of alleged disorderly house held
on conflicting evidence entitled to great weight. not prejudicial error.-State v. Brown, 224.
-Oliver v. New Orleans Ry. & Light Co., 53.1056(3) (Ala.) Exclusion of testimony
1012(1) (Ala.) Finding by trial court sit- shedding no light on quantum of damages held
ting without jury not disturbed unless clearly immaterial.-Franklin v. Argyro, 811.
against weight of evidence given ore tenus.-1057(2) (Ala.) Exclusion of testimony as
Gillespie v. Bartlett & Byers, 858.
to lessors' ownership not questioned by lessee
held not prejudicial.-Hogg v. Frazier, 95.

(H) Harmless Error.

1026 (Miss.) Judgment not reversed be-
cause of erroneous ruling not prejudicial to
complaining party.-Ladnier v. Ingram Day
Lumber Co., 369.

1058(1) (Ala.) Exclusion of evidence cured
by admission of similar evidence.-Nashville
Broom & Supply Co. v. Alabama Broom &
Mattress Co., 132.

~1058(1) (Ala.) Rejection of testimony
subsequently admitted without objection not
1033 (2) (Ala.) Overruling of demurrer fa- prejudicial.-Cumbee v. Eady-Baker Grocery
vorable to appellant will not be reviewed on Co., 336.
appeal.-Carmichael v. City of Dothan, 643.
1058(2) (Ala.) Exclusion of testimony held
1033(3) (Ala.) Defendant cannot complain not prejudicial in view of witness' subsequent
of allegation requiring plaintiff to assume un- testimony.-Southern Ry. Co. v. Dickson, 665.
necessary burden of proof.-Southern Ry. Co.1058(2) (Ala.) Sustaining objection
v. Blackwell, 215.
question to witness who had been examined
1036 (2) (Ala.) Error as for misjoinder thoroughly not reversible error.-Atlanta &
held harmless in view of amendment.-South- St. A. B. R. Co. v. Spivey, 759.
ern Ry. Co. v. Williams, 203.
Sustaining objection to question covered by

to

1039(9) (Miss.) Wrongfully requiring elec- other testimony held not prejudicial.—Id.
tion by plaintiff between two counts not dis-1060 (2) (Ala.) Offer of evidence held not
turbed in absence of showing enabling deter- prejudicial in view of issue submitted.--Ala-
mination whether error harmful.-Louis Cohn bama Great Southern R. Co. v. Ensley Trans-
& Bros. v. Lovell Lumber Co., 188.
fer & Supply Co., 342.

1040 (4) (Ala.) Sustaining demurrer to 1064(1) (Ala.) Instruction on burden of
count of complaint held harmless error in view proof held argumentative and confused, but not
of other counts.-Davis v. Reed, 226.
prejudicial.-Nashville Broom & Supply Co. v.

1040 (6) (Ala.) Sustaining demurrer to Alabama Broom & Mattress Co., 132.
counts of complaint held inmaterial error in 1064 (1) (Miss.) Giving of erroneous in-
view of plaintiff's evidence.-Franklin v. Argy- struction as to custom held not cured.-Allen v.
ro, 811.
Gaddis, 29.
instructions held
1040 (7) (Ala.) Appellant held not injured 1066 (Ala.) Abstract
by ruling sustaining demurrers to pleas alleging without injury.-Stout v. Limestone County,
matters proved under general issue.-Cooledge 352.
v. Collum, 143.

1068 (5) (Ala.) Denial of charge preclud-
1040(10) (Ala.) Error in overruling de-ing, recovery for wantonness and willfulness
murrer to complaint for omission of necessary held not error.-Bradley v. Ashworth, 663.
allegation held cured by instructions requiring
proof.-Southern Ry. Co. v. Dickson, 665.

(I) Error Waived in Appellate Court.

1040 (13) (Ala.) Overruling demurrer to
plea which amounted to but plea of general is-1078(1) (Ala.) Errors not argued and in-
sue held not prejudicial.-Fribush v. Friedman, B. Ry. Co. v. Knight, 233.
sisted on in brief, waived.-Atlanta & St. A.

100.

1042 (4) (Ala.) Denying motion to strike 1078(1) (Ala.) Assignments not argued in
brief nor relied on considered waived.-Moore
from plea not reversible error, since movant
could by motion exclude evidence.-Ex parte 1078(1) (Ala.App.) Assignments waived if
v. First Nat. Bank, 349.
Steverson, 912.
not insisted on in brief.-Dolcito Quarry Co. v.
Cruse-Crawford Mfg. Co., 72.

1048 (5) (Ala.) Overruling objection to
question held not prejudicial in view of witness 1078 (3) (Ala.) Rulings not insisted on and
answer.-Southern Ry. Co. v. Dickson, 665. argued in appellant's brief treated as waived.-
1050(1) (Ala.) Claimant of condemned au- Cooledge v. McArdle, 145.

tomobile held not prejudiced by answer to ques-1079 (Ala.) Assignments of error not in-
tions as to whether he objected to unlawful sisted upon not considered.-Boyette v. Brad-
use of car.-Bearden v. State, 93.

1050(1) (Ala.) Overruling objection to ev-
idence as conclusion held not improper in view
of opportunity of opposite party to develop
facts. Nashville Broom & Supply Co. v. Ala-
bama Broom & Mattress Co., 132.

1050(1) (Ala.) Admission of testimony al-
ready in evidence without objection held without
prejudice.-John R. Thompson & Co. v. Vildi-
bill, 139.

ley, 647.

(J) Decisions of Intermediate Courts.

1089 (5) (Ala.) Supreme Court will not ex-
amine record to find basis for reviewing Court
of Appeals' failure to consider question of
harmless error.-Ex parte Steverson, 912.

(K) Subsequent Appeals.

1050 (1) (Ala.) Whether vendee assuming
debts had paid other creditors instead of plain-1096 (1) (La.) On second appeal, only is-
tiff held immaterial.-Farrell v. Anderson-Du-sues on which case was remanded will be re-

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »