Sinclair v. Taylor
| Decision Date | 07 January 1937 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 992 |
| Citation | 233 Ala. 304,171 So. 728 |
| Parties | SINCLAIR v. TAYLOR. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; John Denson, Judge.
Action by Vera Taylor, a minor, by her next friend, Dave Young against Pauline G. Sinclair, individually and doing business as the A.F. Sinclair Transfer Company, to recover damages for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
Bradley Baldwin, All & White and Kingman C. Shelburne, all of Birmingham, for appellant.
Harrison Kendrick, of Birmingham, for appellee.
This action was commenced in the circuit court of Jefferson county by Vera Taylor, a negro girl, a minor under 21 years of age who sued by her next friend, Dave Young, against Pauline G Sinclair individually and doing business as the A.F. Sinclair Transfer Company, for injuries suffered November 21, 1934. Verdict and judgment was for the plaintiff.
The trial was had on count A as last amended. Demurrer to this count was overruled, and the parties pleaded in short by consent.
Assignments of error challenge the action of the trial court in declining to enter a mistrial on defendant's motion, and in overruling defendant's motion as amended for a new trial.
The cases have been recently collected as to the several classes of improper argument of counsel; so, also, have those dealing with classes of eradicable and ineradicable improper argument of counsel been collected in Birmingham News Co. v. Payne, 230 Ala. 524, 162 So. 116. We need do no more than cite the following: Birmingham Railway, Light & Power Co. v. Drennen, 175 Ala. 338, 57 So. 876, Ann.Cas.1914C, 1037; Wolffe v. Minnis, 74 Ala. 386; Tannehill v. The State, 159 Ala. 51, 48 So. 662; Anderson v. State,
209 Ala. 36, 95 So. 171; Pryor et al. v. Limestone County, 225 Ala. 540, 144 So. 18; American Ry. Express Co. et al. v. Reid, 216 Ala. 479, 113 So. 507; Birmingham Baptist Hospital., Inc., v. Blackwell, 221 Ala. 225, 128 So. 389; Standridge v. Martin, 203 Ala. 486, 84 So. 266; Wagner v. Hazle Township, 215 Pa. 219, 64 A. 405; Dannals v. Sylvania Township, 255 Pa. 156, 99 A. 475, 4 A.L.R. 409.
We are of the opinion the case should be retried, freed of such prejudicial and ineradicable observations outside of the evidence and made by plaintiff's counsel in his argument to the jury and reflecting upon defendant's counsel. The motion for new trial should...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harvey Ragland Co. v. Newton
...statement isn't made in good faith'--constituted an attack upon the sincerity of counsel for appellee and cites Sinclair v. Taylor, 233 Ala. 304, 171 So. 728; Birmingham Electric Co. v. Ryder, 225 Ala. 369, 144 So. 18, and Birmingham Railway, Light & Power Co. v. Drennan, 175 Ala. 338, 57 S......
-
Alabama Gas Co. v. Jones
...expected to deal with them without swerving from the path of duty." Ingalls v. Holleman, Ala.Sup., 12 So.2d 751, 753. In Sinclair v. Taylor, 233 Ala. 304, 171 So. 728, cases are collected dealing with the several classes of improper arguments or conduct of counsel calling for rulings on obj......
-
Life & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Bell
... ... prejudicial--that called for a mistrial on due motion of ... counsel, or the action of the court to that end. Sinclair ... v. Taylor, 233 Ala. 304, 305, 171 So. 728; Anderson ... v. State, 209 Ala. 36, 95 So. 171; Clendenon v ... Yarbrough et al., 233 Ala. 269, ... ...
-
Birmingham Elec. Co. v. Carver
...So. 876; Jackson Lumber Co. v. Trammell, 199 Ala. 536, 74 So. 469; Pryor v. Limestone County, 225 Ala. 540, 144 So. 18; Sinclair v. Taylor, 233 Ala. 304, 171 So. 728; Birmingham Electric Co. v. Perkins, 249 Ala. 426, 31 So.2d 640. We have a line of cases which hold that in a suit for damage......