Blood v. Beadle

Supreme Court of Alabama

Blood v. Beadle

65 Ala. 103

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedNovember 15, 1880

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 65 Ala. 103 (Blood v. Beadle) 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

Blood v. Beadle, 65 Ala. 103 (Ala. 1880).

Pincite

Opinion

STONE, J.'

— On the authority of Ex parte Wallcer, 54 Ala. 577, we feel bound to hold the petition in this case fatally defective. The surprise, or accident complained of, is but the oversight of counsel, which is no excuse for the client. The affidavit is also fatally defective, in not disclosing when the Circuit Court finally adjourned, and in not giving a satisfactory excuse why the claimant did not make an application and showing for a new trial before the adjournment sine die of that term of the court.

Affirmed.

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

STONE, J.'

— On the authority of Ex parte Wallcer, 54 Ala. 577, we feel bound to hold the petition in this case fatally defective. The surprise, or accident complained of, is but the oversight of counsel, which is no excuse for the client. The affidavit is also fatally defective, in not disclosing when the Circuit Court finally adjourned, and in not giving a satisfactory excuse why the claimant did not make an application and showing for a new trial before the adjournment sine die of that term of the court.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 Ala. 103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blood-v-beadle-ala-1880.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack