Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co. v. Devaney
| Decision Date | 07 November 1914 |
| Docket Number | 746 |
| Citation | 189 Ala. 564,66 So. 523 |
| Parties | SLOSS-SHEFFIELD STEEL & IRON CO. v. DEVANEY. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Walker County; J.J. Curtis, Judge.
Action by J.A. Devaney against the Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Bankhead & Bankhead, of Jasper, for appellant.
Ray & Cooner, of Jasper, for appellee.
On the former appeal of this case, the Court of Appeals reversed the judgment on review. 7 Ala.App. 457, 60 So. 990. The action is for damages, and is stated in two counts, one for malicious prosecution and one for false imprisonment. The only errors assigned and urged here are predicated of rulings on the admission and rejection of evidence and with reference to the instruction of the jury. The plaintiff's arrest was for trespass after warning, upon the property of the appellant in Walker county. The plaintiff was effectively warned by representatives of the company not to enter upon its property, except for the limited purpose of going from his dwelling to and from a store and to the office of a doctor.
It appears from the evidence with satisfactory certainty that the plaintiff went upon the property of the company. According to plaintiff's contention, he went upon it only at the request or direction of a member of a company of the Alabama National Guard then stationed on defendant's property, with the view to the preservation of property and the maintenance of peace and good order pending a "strike" by employés of the company at that point. On the other hand, the defendant's contention was that the trespass on the day and occasion described in the complaint was upon its property at a different place, across the railway, from that at which the soldiers were stationed or were. The evidence was in conflict on this point.
"Legal cause or good excuse" (Code, § 7827) renders innocent a trespass after warning. Owens v. State, 74 Ala. 401. The presence of, and objects to be conserved by, the authorized stationing of the soldiers, under the circumstances disclosed by the evidence, upon the premises of the defendant established there an authority superior to that residing in the owner of the premises. If a member of the military company, occupying the premises or associated with the purposes for which the State Guard was there stationed requested or directed the plaintiff to come or go upon the premises, and in pursuance thereof the plaintiff went upon the premises, there could be no doubt, we think, that such circumstances afforded, as a matter of law, "legal cause or good excuse" within the provisions of the trespass after warning statute. Such an invitation or direction was if extended or uttered, the expression of an authority and power superlative with respect to entry upon the premises under the jurisdiction of the military...
To continue reading
Request your trial