One Paige Automobile v. State, 6 Div. 976

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
Writing for the CourtTHOMAS, J.
Citation85 So. 17,203 Ala. 682
PartiesONE PAIGE AUTOMOBILE v. STATE. Appeal of WASHINGTON.
Docket Number6 Div. 976
Decision Date15 January 1920

85 So. 17

203 Ala. 682

ONE PAIGE AUTOMOBILE
v.

STATE.

Appeal of WASHINGTON.

6 Div. 976

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 15, 1920


Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Hugh A. Locke, Judge.

Bill by J.R. Tate as solicitor, on the relation of the State of Alabama, to condemn one Paige automobile, with intervention by Marion Washington, who claimed the car. From a decree denying the claim, and condemning the car, claimant appeals. Affirmed.

Burgin & Jenkins, of Birmingham, for appellant.

J.Q. Smith, Atty. Gen., and Lamar Field, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

THOMAS, J.

This was the trial of an intervention in a proceeding by the state for condemnation of one Paige touring car.

This court will not permit a party to experiment as to what a witness would answer to a question, by accepting it if favorable, and by moving to exclude it if unfavorable, by successfully excepting to the ruling of the trial court admitting the answer. Adams Hdw. Co. v. Wimbish, 201 Ala. 547, 78 So. 901.

The question on cross-examination of claimant, Washington, "Have you ever been convicted before?" was objected to as being immaterial, irrelevant, incompetent, and illegal, and, on being overruled, no exception was then reserved. The solicitor for the state thereafter asked, "Have you?" Claimant's attorney said to witness, "Go ahead; answer it." The witness answered, "Yes, sir," and claimant's counsel said, "We except." This delayed exception was in effect experimenting as to the witness' answer, and, when unfavorable, seeking an exception. This is held to present nothing for review. A. & St. A. B. Ry. Co. v. Fowler, 192 Ala. 373, 379 (7), 68 So. 283; Chamberlain v. Masterson, 29 Ala. 299; Gager v. Doe ex dem. Gordon, 29 Ala. 341; Tuskaloosa Wharf Co. v. Mayor and Aldermen, 38 Ala. 514, 516; B.R.L. & P. Co. v. Demmins, 3 Ala.App. 359, 372, 57 So. 404; Wigmore on Ev. vol. 1, pp. 64, 65, § 20; Jones on Ev. vol. 5, pp. 378-380, § 894.

Inasmuch as no other question is reserved on this appeal, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C.J., and McCLELLAN and SOMERVILLE, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Housing Authority of City of Decatur v. Decatur Land Co., 8 Div. 649
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 2 Abril 1953
    ...objector speculates on the answer and waits until after the answer to reserve an exception to the ruling. One Paige Automobile v. State, 203 Ala. 682, 85 So. 17; Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish, 201 Ala. 547, 78 So. The evidence of the total contract price for the project comes within the inf......
  • Lyons v. Yielding, 6 Div. 983
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 15 Enero 1920
    ...So. 21 203 Ala. 682 LYONS v. YIELDING. 6 Div. 983Supreme Court of AlabamaJanuary 15, Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Hugh A. Locke, Judge. Suit by W.L. Yielding against Solomon Lyons for an accounting, to have a bill of sale declared a mortgage and redeemed. Decree for claimant......
  • Goodwin v. Aaron, 6 Div. 996
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 15 Enero 1920
    ...85 So. 17 203 Ala. 677 GOODWIN v. AARON. 6 Div. 996Supreme Court of AlabamaJanuary 15, Appeal from Circuit Court, Walker County; T.L. Sowell, Judge. Action by Monroe Aaron against P.O. Goodwin for damages for assault and battery. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed. [85 ......

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