Allen v. Young

117 So. 641, 218 Ala. 82, 1928 Ala. LEXIS 163
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided June 28, 1928·No. 6 Div. 47.·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

SOMERVILLE, J.

' The substituted and amended bill in this cause was held subject to demurrer by the trial court, and, on appeal, this court held that the bill contained equity, and was not subject to the demurrer charging a want of equity and other objections to the bill. Stevens v. Hopson et al., 215 Ala. 261, 110 So. .147.

On remandment, the bill was amended in some unessential respects; its equity and prayers remaining unchanged. Respondents again demurred to the bill, and this appeal is from a decree of the trial court overruling the demurrer.

In .that state of the case, the equity of the bill having been .upheld by this court, section 6080 of the Code forbids any other appeal from any .subsequent interlocutory order, judgment, or decree.

It results that this appeal is wrongfully taken, and appellee’s motion to dismiss it must be granted. Ala. Water Service Co. v. City of Anniston, 217 Ala. 271, 116 So. 124; Shields v. Hightower, 216 Ala. 224, 112 So. 834.

Appeal dismissed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and THOMAS and BROWN, JJ., concur.

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

Allen v. Young, 117 So. 641, 218 Ala. 82, 1928 Ala. LEXIS 163 (Ala. 1928).

117 So. 641 (Allen v. Young) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. Hart
91 So. 2d 817 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1956)
Sicard v. Ingalls
35 So. 2d 342 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1948)
First Nat. Bank of Opp v. Wise
193 So. 131 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1939)
Alexander v. Landers
160 So. 342 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1935)
Thomasson v. Benson Hardware Co.
138 So. 287 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1931)
Brasher v. Grayson
122 So. 881 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)