Akin v. Chancy Bros. Hardware & Furniture Co.

93 So. 408, 207 Ala. 523, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 175
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedApril 20, 1922
Docket4 Div. 989.
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 93 So. 408 (Akin v. Chancy Bros. Hardware & Furniture Co.) 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
Akin v. Chancy Bros. Hardware & Furniture Co., 93 So. 408, 207 Ala. 523, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 175 (Ala. 1922).

Opinion

GARDNER. J.

The first question presented by this appeal for consideration is the refusal of the court to give the affirmative charge requested in writing by appellant. The bill of exceptions fails to disclose that it contains all, or substantially all, the evidence upon which the cause was tried. Under these circumstances, therefore, following the uniform decisions of this court, the nation of the trial court. in refusing this affirmative charge will not be reviewed. 7 Mayf. Dig. 134.

The only question which appears to be argued concerning the action of the court in overruling the motion for a new trial is the refusal of the affirmative charge, which has been considered. Moreover, the bill of exceptions makes no reference whatever to the motion for new trial, nor that any exception was reserved to the action of the court in overruling the same. The exception only appears in the judgment entry of the motion, which is set out in the record proper. This is not sufficient evidence, under the decisions of this court, that an exception was reserved to the ruling of the court on the motion. This question, likewise, we are not in position to review. This was expressly decided in Grand Bay Land Co. v. Simpson, 202 Ala. 606, 81 South. 548, and Powell v. Polmar, 201 Ala. 271, 78 South. 47.

These are the only questions presented for consideration, and it therefore results that the judgment appealed from will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE and MID-LER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Sherrill v. Garth
161 So. 482 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1935)
Drennen Motor Co. v. Patrick
141 So. 681 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)
Southern Wood Preserving Co. v. McCamey
118 So. 393 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1928)
King v. Scott
116 So. 681 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1928)
Norrell v. Chilton County
113 So. 229 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1927)
Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Wilson
111 So. 901 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1927)
Clark v. State
111 So. 227 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1927)
Flowers v. State
112 So. 221 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1927)
Martin v. State
113 So. 602 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
Newell Contracting Co. v. Glenn
107 So. 801 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
Chambers v. Maxwell
107 So. 806 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
Ex Parte Rials
101 So. 630 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924)
M. Hohenberg & Co. v. Hendrix
105 So. 195 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924)
Dukes v. State
98 So. 368 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1923)
Webb v. Bryant
96 So. 907 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
93 So. 408, 207 Ala. 523, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akin-v-chancy-bros-hardware-furniture-co-ala-1922.