Bain v. Lang

Alabama Court of Appeals

Bain v. Lang

94 So. 251, 18 Ala. App. 679, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 305

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 30, 1922

Docket8 Div. 993.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 94 So. 251 (Bain v. Lang) 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

Bain v. Lang, 94 So. 251, 18 Ala. App. 679, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 305 (Ala. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinions

The judgment is affirmed.

On Rehearing. Application is made that the judgment of affirmance in this cause be set aside. The bill of exceptions shows that it was presented to and signed by the judge presiding within the time allowed by law. The correctness of this is questioned, however, by *Page 680 the affidavit of counsel, which affirms such not to have been the case. There is no denial of the facts set out in the affidavit.

It may be shown by affidavit that a bill of exceptions was not presented and signed within the time allowed by law, although it appears on its face to have been presented to and signed by the trial judge within such time. Johnson v. Frix,177 Ala. 251, 58 So. 427; Cameron v. North B'ham Saving Bank,17 Ala. App. 210, 84 So. 569; Dement v. Central of Ga. R. Co. 202 Ala. 498, 80 So. 882.

Application overruled.

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

The judgment is affirmed.

On Rehearing. Application is made that the judgment of affirmance in this cause be set aside. The bill of exceptions shows that it was presented to and signed by the judge presiding within the time allowed by law. The correctness of this is questioned, however, by *Page 680 the affidavit of counsel, which affirms such not to have been the case. There is no denial of the facts set out in the affidavit.

It may be shown by affidavit that a bill of exceptions was not presented and signed within the time allowed by law, although it appears on its face to have been presented to and signed by the trial judge within such time. Johnson v. Frix,177 Ala. 251, 58 So. 427; Cameron v. North B'ham Saving Bank,17 Ala. App. 210, 84 So. 569; Dement v. Central of Ga. R. Co. 202 Ala. 498, 80 So. 882.

Application overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 So. 251, 18 Ala. App. 679, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bain-v-lang-alactapp-1922.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack