21 Ala. App. 127 106 So. 67

(106 So. 67)

PIATT et al. v. HILTY.

(6 Div. 696.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

Aug. 4, 1925.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 27, 1925.)

R. J. McClure, of Birmingham, for appellants.

Black & Harris, of Birmingham, for appellee.

SAMFORD, J.

The judgment is against two defendants; both appeal. There is a joint assignment of error. The assignment claims error in that the trial court refused to give the general charge as requested in writing as to one defendant. This could not have injured the defendant who was not entitled to affirmative instructions. As presented, we cannot consider the assignment. Birmingham Finance Co. v. Barber, 19 Ala. App. 609, 99 So. 736; S. S. S. & I. Co. v. Taylor, 16 Ala. App. 241, 77 So. 79; 13 Mich. Dig. 134, par. 721 (1).

The foregoing being the only error argued in brief, and there being no error apparent on the record, the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Piatt v. Hilty
21 Ala. App. 127 106 So. 67

Case Details

Name
Piatt v. Hilty
Decision Date
Aug 4, 1925
Citations

21 Ala. App. 127

106 So. 67

Jurisdiction
Alabama

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!