In James Talcott, Inc. v. Jack Cole Co., 5 Cir. 1971, 441 F.2d 325, we dealt with the correctness of a directed verdict on a misrepresentation claim under another Alabama statute. We noted that our decision to reverse and direct a trial verdict was prompted by the Seventh Amendment mandate to preserve the right of trial by jury in suits at common law.
; James Talcott, Inc. v. Jack Cole Co., 441 F.2d 325, 329 (5th Cir. 1971) (“We hold, however, that, nonetheless, the question of reasonableness was for the jury.”); Hagerty v. L&L Marine Servs., Inc., 788 F.2d 315, 318 (5th Cir. 1986) (“It is for the jury to decide questions such as the existence, severity and reasonableness of the fear.”)
We recognize, of course, that, where contrary inferences may be drawn by the factfinder as to the date on which the plaintiff was put on reasonable inquiry of the alleged misrepresentation, this factual issue precludes disposition by summary judgment. See Marks Fitzgerald Furniture Co. v. Clarklift of Alabama, Inc., supra; Elrod v. Ford, 489 So.2d 534 (Ala. 1986); Cartwright v. Braly, 218 Ala. 49, 117 So. 477 (1928); Cumberland Capital Corp. v. Robinette, 57 Ala. App. 697, 331 So.2d 709 (1976); James Talcott, Inc. v. Jack Cole Co., 441 F.2d 325 (5th Cir. 1971). Nonetheless, here, we agree with the trial court.