A. Diniaco & Bros. v. Nelson

93 So. 921, 208 Ala. 695
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedMay 11, 1922
Docket6 Div. 473.
StatusPublished

This text of 93 So. 921 (A. Diniaco & Bros. v. Nelson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
A. Diniaco & Bros. v. Nelson, 93 So. 921, 208 Ala. 695 (Ala. 1922).

Opinion

SOMERVILLE, J.

The appeal is from a .judgment awarding compensation to- an injured employe, under the Workmen’s Compensation .Act (Acts 1919, pp. 206—239). We have heretofore held that such a judgment can be reviewed only by the common-law writ of certiorari, and only as to errors apparent upon the record. Woodward Iron Co. v. Bradford, 90 South. 803. 1 Appellant has availed himself of that remedy in this cause concurrently with this appeal, and thereby obtained relief from the erroneous judgment below. Ex parte A. Diniaco & Bros., 93 South. 388. 2 Under the rule stated, this appeal will be dismissed at the cost of appellant. Appeal dismissed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and McCLELLAN and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
1

206 Ala. 447.

2

207 Ala. 685.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ex Parte A. Diniaco & Bros.
93 So. 388 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1922)
Woodward Iron Co. v. Bradford
90 So. 803 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
93 So. 921, 208 Ala. 695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-diniaco-bros-v-nelson-ala-1922.