Alabama Great Southern Railway Co. v. Taylor

Alabama Court of Appeals

Alabama Great Southern Railway Co. v. Taylor

61 So. 475, 7 Ala. App. 583, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 102

DecidedFebruary 6, 1913

StatusPublished

This text of 61 So. 475 (Alabama Great Southern Railway Co. v. Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alabama Great Southern Railway Co. v. Taylor, 61 So. 475, 7 Ala. App. 583, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 102 (Ala. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

PELHAM, J.

This case is appealed from a trial had before the judge of the county court of Tuscaloosa county, sitting Avithout a jury. S'ection 16 of the act establishing the county court provides that: “Either party may by bill of exceptions review the conclusions and judgments of the court upon the evidence,” etc. — Acts 1896-97, p. 270. The bill of exceptions does not disclose that any conclusion was reached by the trial judge or judgment entered by the county court on the evidence. Under the provisions of section 16, above referred to, the conclusions and judgment of the trial court on the evidence, in a case tried without a jury, are not subject to revieAv here, unless presented for re-vieAV by a bill of exceptions. — Alosi v. Birmingham Water Works Co., 1 Ala. App. 630, 55 South. 1029.

Other assignments of error than those predicated upon the conclusion reached and judgment rendered are not insisted on or discussed in brief of counsel, and Avill not be considered. — L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Holland, 173 Ala. 675, 55 South. 1001; Harper v. Raisin Fer. Co., 148 Ala. 360, 42 South. 550; Hodge v. Rambo, 155 Ala. 175, 45 South. 678; Fitts v. Phoenix Co., 153 Ala. 635, 45 South. 150; Ashford v. Ashford, 136 Ala. 633, 34 South. 10, 96 Am. St. Rep. Rep. 82; Pearson v. Adanns, 129 Ala. 169, 29 South. 977; Rule of Practice No. 10, p. 1508, Code 1907.

[585]*585The case presents for onr consideration nothing authorizing a reversal, and the judgment of the court below will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PELHAM, J.

This case is appealed from a trial had before the judge of the county court of Tuscaloosa county, sitting Avithout a jury. S'ection 16 of the act establishing the county court provides that: “Either party may by bill of exceptions review the conclusions and judgments of the court upon the evidence,” etc. — Acts 1896-97, p. 270. The bill of exceptions does not disclose that any conclusion was reached by the trial judge or judgment entered by the county court on the evidence. Under the provisions of section 16, above referred to, the conclusions and judgment of the trial court on the evidence, in a case tried without a jury, are not subject to revieAv here, unless presented for re-vieAV by a bill of exceptions. — Alosi v. Birmingham Water Works Co., 1 Ala. App. 630, 55 South. 1029.

Other assignments of error than those predicated upon the conclusion reached and judgment rendered are not insisted on or discussed in brief of counsel, and Avill not be considered. — L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Holland, 173 Ala. 675, 55 South. 1001; Harper v. Raisin Fer. Co., 148 Ala. 360, 42 South. 550; Hodge v. Rambo, 155 Ala. 175, 45 South. 678; Fitts v. Phoenix Co., 153 Ala. 635, 45 South. 150; Ashford v. Ashford, 136 Ala. 633, 34 South. 10, 96 Am. St. Rep. Rep. 82; Pearson v. Adanns, 129 Ala. 169, 29 South. 977; Rule of Practice No. 10, p. 1508, Code 1907.

[585]*585The case presents for onr consideration nothing authorizing a reversal, and the judgment of the court below will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 So. 475, 7 Ala. App. 583, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alabama-great-southern-railway-co-v-taylor-alactapp-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack