Alabama Western R. Co. v. Downey
| Decision Date | 30 May 1912 |
| Parties | ALABAMA WESTERN R. CO. v. DOWNEY. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from City Court of Birmingham; C. W. Ferguson, Judge.
Action by Daniel Downey against the Alabama Western Railroad Company for work and labor done. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
The only question presented by the assignment of error is the action of the trial court in admitting the stenographic report of the evidence of Ben Talley, C. H. Roehrig, and Baxter L. Brown as witnesses for the plaintiff, under the circumstances as shown by the opinion.
Percy Benners & Burr, of Birmingham, for appellant.
Charles Dougherty, of Birmingham, for appellee.
On the trial of a suit brought by appellee against appellant for the contract price of work and labor done, plaintiff was permitted to use in evidence the confessedly relevant and material testimony of three witnesses who had been examined and cross-examined upon a former trial of the same cause upon identical issues, which trial for some reason not appearing had not determined the cause. The testimony so used was reproduced and authenticated as follows: It had been taken down in shorthand by one Magee, who was shown to have done so while acting as a duly appointed and sworn assistant official stenographer of Jefferson county under and by authority of the act of March 4, 1901, entitled, "An act to provide an official stenographer for Jefferson county and to prescribe his duties and compensation." Local Acts 1900-01, p. 2255 et seq. Appended to the transcript of the testimony was a certificate shown to have been signed by the said Magee, in which he certified that he had correctly reported stenographically the testimony on the former trial and that the transcript thereof was full, true, and correct. It was shown without dispute that both the witnesses whose testimony was offered and the stenographer were at the time of the trial without the state, and lived without the state and beyond the reach of process, though this, so far as concerned the absence of the stenographer, may have been of no consequence.
Section 5 of the act to provide an official stenographer for Jefferson county reads as follows: "That the shorthand notes taken by such official stenographer or his assistants and the transcript thereof, when such notes are transcribed into longhand and certified to be correct by the stenographer taking the shorthand notes,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Manning v. State
... ... well as for the purpose of contradiction or impeachment ... Alabama Western R.R. Co. v. Downey, 177 Ala. 612, 58 ... [116 So. 362] Loudemilk v. State, 4 Ala.App ... ...
-
Howard v. State
...Harper v. State, 16 Ala.App. 538, 79 So. 632 (1918); Todd v. State, 13 Ala.App. 301, 69 So. 325 (1915); Alabama Western Railroad Co. v. Downey, 177 Ala. 612, 58 So. 918 (1912). Another question presented by this appeal is whether the certification by the Clerk of the Supreme Court was suffi......
-
Gulf States Steel Co. v. Christison
... ... The court reporter's notes are such. Section ... 6734, Code; Ala. West. R. R. Co. v. Downey, 177 Ala ... 612, 58 So. 918. Likewise a bill of exceptions is so ... regarded. Section 6432, ... ...
-
Brown v. State, 1 Div. 104
...Harper v. State, 16 Ala.App. 53, 79 So. 632 (1918); Todd v. State, 13 Ala.App. 301, 69 So. 325 (1915); Alabama Western Railroad Co. v. Downey, 177 Ala. 612, 58 So. 918 (1912)." Howard v. State, 49 Ala.App. 548, 274 So.2d 104, 106 There is some undesirable vagueness as to the exact status of......