47 So. 332 (Ala. 1908), Sparks v. McCrary
|Citation:||47 So. 332, 156 Ala. 382|
|Opinion Judge:||McCLELLAN, J.|
|Party Name:||SPARKS v. MCCRARY. [*]|
|Attorney:||Walter S. Smith, for appellant. Whatley & Cornelious, for appellee.|
|Judge Panel:||TYSON, C.J., and ANDERSON and DENSON, JJ., concur.|
|Case Date:||June 30, 1908|
|Court:||Supreme Court of Alabama|
Appeal from Clay County Court; W. J. Pearce, Judge.
Action in case by J. W. Sparks against John D. McCrary. From a judgment sustaining demurrers to the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.
The original complaint is as follows: "(1) Plaintiff claims of defendant $5,000 damages, for that heretofore, to wit, on March 23, 1906, plaintiff was engaged in the mercantile business in the town of Lineville, Ala., carrying a general line of goods, wares, and merchandise, which plaintiff was selling principally for cash, and plaintiff had been engaged in said business for about two years prior to said date, and was dependent upon said business for a livelihood for himself and family; that on or about March 23, 1906, defendant did come into plaintiff's store, where and while plaintiff and three or four clerks were waiting on customers and selling plaintiff's goods, wares, and merchandise to the customers who were in plaintiff's store, and in the presence of many customers, defendant did wrongfully forbid plaintiff and his clerks from selling plaintiff's said goods, wares, and merchandise, and did wrongfully forbid the customers who were in plaintiff's store from buying plaintiff's said goods, wares, and merchandise, stating to said customers that he would take down the names of all parties who made purchases, and that they would have to attend court; and, on being asked by plaintiff by what authority he forbade the sale of the goods, wares, and merchandise of plaintiff, defendant replied, by the authority of the telegram which he had received from Dougherty-Ward-Little Company, which telegram defendant read to and in the presence of plaintiff, his clerks and customers. And plaintiff avers that on account of the action of defendant that plaintiff's customers stopped buying, and he and his clerks were thereby forced to stop selling, said goods, wares, and merchandise; plaintiff's said customers leaving his said store, to the damage of plaintiff as aforesaid." (2) This count is similar in fact and in statements to count 1, except that it is alleged that defendant, without legal authority and without process of law, did wrongfully, willfully, wantonly, and maliciously do the things complained of in the first count, and as a result the customers were frightened from his store; some leaving without paying for the goods they had already purchased, and others, who were prospective purchasers, being turned away before...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP