matters inquiry in Alabama

1972Although the extent and course of the examination is largely within the discretion of the court, the inquiry permitted under this section should be liberal and extend to any and all matters touching the interest, bias or qualifications of the prospective juror. “ * * * gives to parties having respective peremptory challenges or the right to a struck jury, the right within the limits of propriety and pertinence to reasonably propound questions to jurors to enable such party or his counsel to intelligently exercise that right, though the matters of which inquiry is made are not a disqualificatio

1972Although the extent and course of the examination is largely within the discretion of the court, the inquiry permitted under this section should be liberal and extend to any and all matters touching the interest, bias or qualifications of the prospective juror. “ * * * gives to parties having respective peremptory challenges or the right to a struck jury, the right within the limits of propriety and pertinence to reasonably propound questions to jurors to enable such party or his counsel to intelligently exercise that right, though the matters of which inquiry is made are not a disqualificatio

1959This code section “gives to parties having respective peremptory challenges or the right to a struck jury, the right within the limits of propriety and pertinence to reasonably propound questions to jurors to enable such party or his counsel to intelligently exercise that right, though the matters of which inquiry is made are not a disqualification.” Dyer v. State, 241 Ala. 679 , 4 So.2d 311, 313 ; Cox v. Bennett, 250 Ala. 698 , 36 So.2d 86 ; Redus v. State, 243 Ala. 320 , 9 So.2d 914 ; Rose v. Magro, 220 Ala. 120 , 124 So. 296 .

1959This code section “gives to parties having respective peremptory challenges or the right to a struck jury, the right within the limits of propriety and pertinence to reasonably propound questions to jurors to enable such party or his counsel to intelligently exercise that right, though the matters of which inquiry is made are not a disqualification.” Dyer v. State, 241 Ala. 679 , 4 So.2d 311, 313 ; Cox v. Bennett, 250 Ala. 698 , 36 So.2d 86 ; Redus v. State, 243 Ala. 320 , 9 So.2d 914 ; Rose v. Magro, 220 Ala. 120 , 124 So. 296 .

1962Southern Indemnity Ass’n v. Hoffman, 16 Ala.App. 274 , 77 So. 424 .

1962Southern Indemnity Ass’n v. Hoffman, 16 Ala.App. 274 , 77 So. 424 .

1959This code section “gives to parties having respective peremptory challenges or the right to a struck jury, the right within the limits of propriety and pertinence to reasonably propound questions to jurors to enable such party or his counsel to intelligently exercise that right, though the matters of which inquiry is made are not a disqualification.” Dyer v. State, 241 Ala. 679 , 4 So.2d 311, 313 ; Cox v. Bennett, 250 Ala. 698 , 36 So.2d 86 ; Redus v. State, 243 Ala. 320 , 9 So.2d 914 ; Rose v. Magro, 220 Ala. 120 , 124 So. 296 .

1959This code section “gives to parties having respective peremptory challenges or the right to a struck jury, the right within the limits of propriety and pertinence to reasonably propound questions to jurors to enable such party or his counsel to intelligently exercise that right, though the matters of which inquiry is made are not a disqualification.” Dyer v. State, 241 Ala. 679 , 4 So.2d 311, 313 ; Cox v. Bennett, 250 Ala. 698 , 36 So.2d 86 ; Redus v. State, 243 Ala. 320 , 9 So.2d 914 ; Rose v. Magro, 220 Ala. 120 , 124 So. 296 .

1959This code section “gives to parties having respective peremptory challenges or the right to a struck jury, the right within the limits of propriety and pertinence to reasonably propound questions to jurors to enable such party or his counsel to intelligently exercise that right, though the matters of which inquiry is made are not a disqualification.” Dyer v. State, 241 Ala. 679 , 4 So.2d 311, 313 ; Cox v. Bennett, 250 Ala. 698 , 36 So.2d 86 ; Redus v. State, 243 Ala. 320 , 9 So.2d 914 ; Rose v. Magro, 220 Ala. 120 , 124 So. 296 .

1959This code section “gives to parties having respective peremptory challenges or the right to a struck jury, the right within the limits of propriety and pertinence to reasonably propound questions to jurors to enable such party or his counsel to intelligently exercise that right, though the matters of which inquiry is made are not a disqualification.” Dyer v. State, 241 Ala. 679 , 4 So.2d 311, 313 ; Cox v. Bennett, 250 Ala. 698 , 36 So.2d 86 ; Redus v. State, 243 Ala. 320 , 9 So.2d 914 ; Rose v. Magro, 220 Ala. 120 , 124 So. 296 .

1959“The right of inquiry under the statute is a broad right just so it is not exercised in bad faith or merely designed to prejudice the case.” Cox v. Bennett, supra [ 250 Ala. 698 , 36 So.2d 88 ]; Duke v. Gaines, 224 Ala. 519 , 140 So. 600 .

1959“The right of inquiry under the statute is a broad right just so it is not exercised in bad faith or merely designed to prejudice the case.” Cox v. Bennett, supra [ 250 Ala. 698 , 36 So.2d 88 ]; Duke v. Gaines, 224 Ala. 519 , 140 So. 600 .

1929Such are the general authorities: Stone v. Monticello Const. Co., 135 Ky. 659 , 117 S. W. 369 , 40 L.

1929Such are the general authorities: Stone v. Monticello Const. Co., 135 Ky. 659 , 117 S. W. 369 , 40 L.

1917In Burton v. Driggs, 20 Wall. 125, 136 , 22 L.

1917In Burton v. Driggs, 20 Wall. 125, 136 , 22 L.

1914Pl. & Pr. p. 921; 2 Cyc. pp. 980, 986, 987; Jones v. Adkins, 151 Ala. 316 , 44 South. 53 .

1914Pl. & Pr. p. 921; 2 Cyc. pp. 980, 986, 987; Jones v. Adkins, 151 Ala. 316 , 44 South. 53 .

1913“In trover, not guilty puts in issue every matter which might be pleaded in bar, except a release.” —Ryan, et al. v. Young, 147 Ala. 660 , 41 South. 954 ; Barrett v. City of Mobile, 129 Ala. 179 ; 39 South. 36 , 87 Am.

1913“In trover, not guilty puts in issue every matter which might be pleaded in bar, except a release.” —Ryan, et al. v. Young, 147 Ala. 660 , 41 South. 954 ; Barrett v. City of Mobile, 129 Ala. 179 ; 39 South. 36 , 87 Am.

1913“In trover, not guilty puts in issue every matter which might be pleaded in bar, except a release.” —Ryan, et al. v. Young, 147 Ala. 660 , 41 South. 954 ; Barrett v. City of Mobile, 129 Ala. 179 ; 39 South. 36 , 87 Am.

1911The principle seems to he settled on reason and authority that, where a demurrer is improperly sustained to a plea, the error is harmless and will not work a reversal when there are other pleas not demurred to, which set up substantially the same matters of defense as did the plea demurred to, and the party has the benefit of a trial on such other pleas. —Holmes v. Bank, 120 Ala. 493 , 24 South. 959 ; First National Bank v. Chandler, 144 Ala. 286 , 39 South, 822 , 113 Am.

1911The principle seems to he settled on reason and authority that, where a demurrer is improperly sustained to a plea, the error is harmless and will not work a reversal when there are other pleas not demurred to, which set up substantially the same matters of defense as did the plea demurred to, and the party has the benefit of a trial on such other pleas. —Holmes v. Bank, 120 Ala. 493 , 24 South. 959 ; First National Bank v. Chandler, 144 Ala. 286 , 39 South, 822 , 113 Am.

1911The principle seems to he settled on reason and authority that, where a demurrer is improperly sustained to a plea, the error is harmless and will not work a reversal when there are other pleas not demurred to, which set up substantially the same matters of defense as did the plea demurred to, and the party has the benefit of a trial on such other pleas. —Holmes v. Bank, 120 Ala. 493 , 24 South. 959 ; First National Bank v. Chandler, 144 Ala. 286 , 39 South, 822 , 113 Am.

1907The matters set up in the pleas constituted a complete defense to the action, and the pleas were not subject to any of the other grounds set forth in the demurrers The law is too well settled in this state to admit of controversy that a judicial officer cannot he held liable for damages in a civil action for his judicial acts, no matter how mistaken or erroneous they may be — Coleman v. Roberts, 113 Ala. 323 , 21 South. 449 , 36 L.

1897Parties in chancery, must reduce to writing objections to the admissibility of evidence, incorporating them in the note of submission, or otherwise calling them directly to the attention of the chancellor, or the presumption arises, that all such objections are waived. — Seals v. Robinson, 75 Ala. 363 ; Binford v. Dement, 72 Ala. 491 . •We conclude, that no one of the matters of defense preferred.by the answer, is availing, and that the evidence entitled the complainant to relief.

1897Parties in chancery, must reduce to writing objections to the admissibility of evidence, incorporating them in the note of submission, or otherwise calling them directly to the attention of the chancellor, or the presumption arises, that all such objections are waived. — Seals v. Robinson, 75 Ala. 363 ; Binford v. Dement, 72 Ala. 491 . •We conclude, that no one of the matters of defense preferred.by the answer, is availing, and that the evidence entitled the complainant to relief.