Abraham Bros. v. Means
| Decision Date | 02 April 1918 |
| Docket Number | 3 Div. 216 |
| Parties | ABRAHAM BROS. v. MEANS. April 2, 1918 |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; W.W. Pearson, Judge.
On second application for rehearing. Application overruled.
For former opinion, see 75 So. 187.
Steiner, Crum & Weil, of Montgomery, for appellant.
Hill, Hill, Whiting & Stern, of Montgomery, for appellee.
This case was carried to the Supreme Court on certiorari, and by that court reversed and remanded to this court for further action. We are now asked to pass upon the questions not considered in the first opinion. Abraham Bros. v. Noah Means, 75 So. 187.
The cause was tried on two counts; count 2 claiming for a breach of warranty, and count 3 for money had and received. There was nothing to indicate that the claims as set out were for inconsistent remedies growing out of the same transaction. The complaint therefore was not subject to demurrer on that ground. Code 1907, § 5328. Issue being joined on both counts, and there being evidence tending to sustain each of the counts, the refusal to give the affirmative charge as to either count was not error. Both counts being before the jury, and there being evidence tending to support each, the court properly charged on the law as applicable to each count.
Where it develops on the trial that there are counts in the complaint asserting inconsistent remedies growing out of the same transaction, the court, on motion, will require the plaintiff to elect as to which remedy he will pursue, but the defendant did not make this motion, but allowed the trial to proceed to judgment.
Application overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Butler v. Walton
...described the defective condition of the tractor to put plaintiff on notice of what he was to defend against. Abraham Bros. v. Means, 16 Ala.App. 429, 78 So. 459; Franklin Motor Car Co. v. Ratliff, 207 Ala. 341, 92 So. Plea E is as follows: '(E) Comes the defendant and without in any way co......
- Whitehead v. State
-
Kilborn v. Henderson
...inconsistent remedies growing out of the same transaction.' And in denying the second application for rehearing in this case, 16 Ala.App. 429, 78 So. 459, 460, the court 'Issue being joined on both counts, and there being evidence tending to sustain each of the counts, the refusal to give t......
-
Webb v. Litz
...the court, and the costs fairly apportioned.' The practice under this section was well elucidated by this court in Abraham Bros. v. Means, 16 Ala.App. 429, 78 So. 459, 460, wherein the opinion 'The cause was tried on two counts; count 2 claiming for a breach of warranty, and count 3 for mon......