Davis F. Stakely

Helen Christison was convicted of forgery in the second degree and embezzlement after altering a cancelled check drawn on Etowah County school funds by erasing her name as payee and substituting another teacher's name, then appropriating the funds. The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the perforated and marked cancelled check qualified as a receipt that could be forged under the statute and that the check remained school property in her custody as bookkeeper rather than her personal instrument. It rejected double jeopardy arguments based on a prior acquittal for embezzlement of money, holding that proof of embezzling a check did not support the earlier charge and that the alteration constituted fraudulent appropriation of the instrument.

criminal lawpropertyprocedure

This case concerned a dispute over ownership of oil and mineral rights on a 12-acre tract of land in Alabama. In 1928, the original grantor conveyed the surface rights while including a reservation clause retaining one-half of the oil and all minerals for herself and her heirs; the land later passed to the complainants via mesne conveyances that repeated the reservation. The trial court ruled the reservation void due to inconsistency with the granting clause's words of inheritance, but the Alabama Supreme Court reversed, holding that the deed as a whole clearly evidenced an intent to reserve the mineral interests, which are treated as separate estates from the surface. The court further interpreted the reservation language to mean one-half of the oil plus all other minerals, and remanded the case.

property

This case was a negligence action brought by plaintiff Blanchard Williams against defendants B.O. Grandquest and Carl V. Reed for personal injuries sustained in a May 1959 motor vehicle collision on U.S. Highway 31 near Bay Minette, Alabama. The jury returned a $15,000 verdict for the plaintiff, which the trial court upheld after denying the defendants' motion for a new trial. On appeal, the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to correct the evidence transcript, that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict despite conflicts with physical facts, and that various requested jury charges were either covered by other instructions or unsupported by the claims and evidence. The court also ruled that references to insurance were properly limited and did not require further action.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a dispute between Clarke-Washington Electric Membership Corporation, an electric cooperative, and Alabama Power Company over whether the power company could extend its lines into an area south and west of Thomasville that the cooperative had been serving exclusively. The cooperative sought an injunction to prevent duplication of its lines, citing prior agreements from 1946-1947 and a 1953 contract. The court affirmed the lower court's decision sustaining the demurrer, holding that the 1953 contract explicitly allowed service within municipal corporate limits where a franchise exists, and the recent annexation of the area into Thomasville triggered that exception. The court reasoned that the contract superseded earlier agreements and estopped the cooperative from claiming exclusivity in the annexed territory.

business & regulatory

In Williams v. Colquett, appellees Colquett and Wishum filed an equity bill seeking a temporary injunction to block enforcement of a $5,000 tort judgment obtained against them by appellant Williams in an auto accident case, alleging undisclosed collaboration between Williams and co-defendant Hair that shifted full liability to them. The trial court granted the injunction and denied the motion to dissolve it. The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed, holding that a prior similar bill's dismissal was without prejudice, the present action was timely filed without laches or res judicata, and the unclean hands doctrine did not bar relief because the appellees sought no contribution from a joint tortfeasor.

proceduretorts & liability

This case concerned a divorce and child custody dispute between Elsie B. Stallworth, originally from Louisiana, and Nicholas B. Stallworth, a resident of Washington County, Alabama, who had lived together in Alabama until their 1959 separation. The wife filed first in Louisiana for a separation from bed and board and custody of their two minor children, obtaining a decree awarding her custody; the husband then filed in Alabama seeking divorce on grounds of abandonment and custody, later amending to claim the required one-year period. The Alabama trial court granted the husband a divorce and custody, but the Supreme Court held that the abandonment claim failed to meet the statutory one-year requirement preceding the filing of the bill and that the Louisiana court, having first obtained jurisdiction over the children who were present there, was entitled to full faith and credit for its custody decree. The court therefore reversed the custody award, directed dismissal of the Alabama bill as to custody, and dismissed the appeal in part.

family law