Graves v. Cruse-Crawford Mfg. Co.

Decision Date19 June 1919
Docket Number6 Div. 834
Citation203 Ala. 202,82 So. 452
PartiesGRAVES v. CRUSE-CRAWFORD MFG. CO.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; John C. Pugh, Judge.

Action bye Richard Graves against the Cruse-Crawford Manufacturing Company, for damages for personal injuries. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Plaintiff sues for injuries received while walking along a public alley in the city of Birmingham as the result of falling over a pile of iron placed there by the defendant. The complaint claims as upon simple negligence and wanton or willful injury, and charges that "plaintiff's right leg was severely and seriously wrenched and bruised and his right ankle was fractured and sprained, *** permanently injuring plaintiff and permanently rendering him less able to earn a livelihood." The defense was the general issue and several pleas of contributory negligence. On cross-examination the defendant was permitted, over plaintiff's objection, to ask the defendant when he sued J.C. Long; when he sued Catanzano Bros.; and when he sued the Birmingham Railway, Light & Power Company. In permitting these questions and the answers thereto the trial judge stated that they were admitted subject to being connected up by showing that these were suits for the same injury now sued for. Later on defendant was permitted over plaintiff's objection to read in evidence the complaint filed by the plaintiff in a suit against Catanzano Bros. in November 1914, claiming damages for being knocked down by defendant's motorcar and injured as to his hips, back stomach, and other organs, and alleging that he was thereby permanently injured; also to read in evidence the complaint filed by this company in a suit against J.C. Long in 1913 alleging that he was lacerated, torn, bruised, and otherwise injured by a wire negligently left near the sidewalk by the defendant, and claimed that he was thereby permanently injured. The trial court stated that these complaints were admitted in the evidence to show the physical condition of plaintiff, and were pertinent only as to the measures of damages in this case.

Denson & Ivey, of Birmingham, for appellant.

Whitaker & Nesbit, of Birmingham, for appellee.

SOMERVILLE J.

We think the trial court erred in allowing defendant to show that plaintiff had previously and severally sued three other parties for alleged personal injuries, and in allowing the complaints in two of those cases to be read to the jury.

1. Pleadings in other cases,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Birmingham Electric Co. v. Wood
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • October 30, 1930
    ... ... pleading was drawn under the direction of the party sought to ... be impeached. Graves v. Cruse-Crawford Mfg. Co., 203 ... Ala. 202, 82 So. 452; Ex parte E. C. Payne Lumber Co., 203 ... ...
  • Am. Safety Indem. Co. v. T.H. Taylor, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • March 14, 2013
    ...such, they should not be credited over the arbitration complaint or relied upon as established facts. See, e.g., Graves v. Cruse-Crawford Mfg. Co., 82 So. 452, 452 (Ala. 1919) ("Pleadings in other cases . . . are not evidence against him."); Hicks v. Jackson County Comm'n, 990 So. 2d 904, 9......
  • Cole v. Louisville & N. R. Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • October 31, 1957
    ...Elec. Co. v. Wood] 222 Ala. 103, 130 So. 786; [State v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.], 202 Ala. 558, 81 So. 60; [Graves v. Cruse-Crawford Mfg. Co.], 203 Ala. 202, 82 So. 452).' Consonant with this principle appellee proved that the pleadings were drawn from facts given by the appellant. There......
  • Barnes v. Burke
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • September 30, 1970
    ...Co. v. Wood, 222 Ala. 103, 130 So. 786; State v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 202 Ala. 558, 81 So. 60, and Graves v. Cruse-Crawford Mfg. Co., 203 Ala. 202, 82 So. 452--all of which refer to pleadings in a former action being admissible in another In a more recent case, Maddox v. Ennis, 274 A......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT