The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-01-15
VERDICT FOR
 MRS. KNABE Damages Put Back to
 $10,000 WORD eUNTl" TROUBLESOME Many Applications for Rehearing
 Are Denied. lsdetaon I2o of Municipal Code Act Is Declared Void By Decision of
 Case From Jefferson EeA County.
WORD eUNTl" TROUBLESOME

At It's session Thursday morning, Che Supreme Court of the State of Ala kAma finally disposed of the case in- volvtng the suit instituted by Mrs. Matilda A. F. Knabe against the MontEomery Traction Company for &50000 damages claimed for injuries sustained at the time of the State Fair of several years ago. The application Tor a rehearing of the case made by the Traction Company was over-ruled, and Mrs. Knabe is to receive the sum of $10.000 damages.
 The case was most interesting one in that the Supreme Court had to re- verse itself because of the one word until" The same word incidentally lost Mrs. Knabe $2,500 in the amount of damages given her, as the original verdict of the lower court was for &12.500.
 At the time of the decision of the lower court awarding the damages. the Traction Company asked for a new trial. This being denied by the lower court, the Traction Company took an HpDeal to the Supreme Court. Justice Denson ruled that the damages should be awarded, but held that the sum of x1z,5ee should be paid owing to the fact that July was out of the term of the city court. the term having ex- pired at midnight July 5. Mrs. Knabes agreement to the reduction was held ! void because of the invaliditv of the trial day.
 In the holding of the court the term was to continue "untir' a certain Monday. which Monday in this particu- lar instance was July 6. In conformi- ty with a previous decision of the court rendered by Justice Haralson in the Johnson case. it was held that "there Is well settled rule that the word until generally implies an in- tss4s fr lad hn tn " ch it refers. unless the contrary appears from the context of the statute or in- srument in which tpe word Is used" The remaining justices held that the word should be used in an inclusive and not an exclusive sense.
 The decision as handed down yester- day, however. finally disposes of the case so far as the Supreme Court -ot Alabama is concerned, and Mrs. Knaha VIII be paid s10.000.
 Tn the matter of the State of Ala bama ex rel, Attorney General vs. L. and N Railway Co, ct al, the appli- cation for a rehearing was refused by the court / This case has attracted 4 great deal of attention in that 1t in- wolves the occupation of the end of Lee and Moulton streets by the rail- road company's freight shed. thus cut ting or an approach to the Union De- pot from Lee street. By the refusal
 
 the case. ths railroad Kill continue to occupy the street with the she'd
 Tn the case of the State of Alabama ex rel, City of Birmingham vs. H. c. Miller as treasurer, appealed from the Jefferson coInty Circuit Court the Su preme Court affirmed the refusal of the lower court in denying the writ of mandamus sought for.
 Tn this case section 120 of the Mu- nfcIpal Code act approved August 13, 1907. is involved. The Supreme Court held that this section of the act to be void, having been passed in violation of Section 45 of the Constitution.
 The. City of Birmingham sought to compel the treasurer of Jefferson coun- ty to pay two warrants. one for $10,- GOO for the ten cents road fund" and the other for 35.O0O for the public bridge ~building fund" The claim of the petitioners for the mandamus was based upon Section 120 of the Munich pal Code Act. Ind the treasurer of the county questioned the validity of the act A mandamus was applied for in the Circuit Court of Jefferson county. the judge declining to grant the appli- cation. His decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
 The full list of opinions and decis- ions on applications for rehearing fol- low:
 RuIings on Application For Rehearings.
 Byrd c. Willis vs. Kate Rice, ct al.. appeal from Mobile Chancery Court. application overruled.
 Mobile Improvement and Building Co, vs. Louis Stein. appeal from Mo- hiIe Circuit Court, application Over- ruled.
 Mobile, Jackson and Kansas City R. F. Co, vs. Bay Shore Lumber Co, ap- peal from Mobile Law and Equity Court. application overruled.
 gf0h ot al rN and Co.,. appeal from Monroe Circuit Court, application overruled.
 OIlinger and Bruce Dry Goods Co. vs. Payton R. Tunstall. appeal from Mo bile Circuit Court, application overrul- cd.
 Southern Hardware and Supply Go. vs. Standard Equipment O., appeal from Mobile Law and Equity Court, application overruled.
 City of Mobile vs. Factors and Trad CTS Insurance Co.,, appeal from Mobile City Court application overruled.
 Selma Street and Suburban Ky. Co. vs. J. c. Campbell, appeal from Selma City Court. application overruled.
 State of Alabama. ex. rel. Attorney General vs. l.. and N. R. R. Co.,. ct al, appeal from Montgomery City Court. duplication overruled.
 Montgomery Traction Go. vs. Matilda A. F. Knabe, appeal from Montgomery
 
 tion overruied.
 J. A. Adams vs. D. G. Addison, ap- peal from Barbour Chancery Court, application overruled.
 Town of Cottonwood. ct aI., vs. 1T. M. Austin Co., appeal from Houston Circuit Court. application overruled.
 Tallassee Falls Mfg. Go. vs. George m. Moore, appeal from Tallapoosa Circuit Court, application overruled.
 Tallassee Falls Mfg. Go. vs. Court of County Commissioners of Tallapoosa county. appeal from Tallapoosa Chan eery Court. application overruled.