City of Albany v. Banks

Alabama Court of Appeals

City of Albany v. Banks

109 So. 117, 21 Ala. App. 411, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 174

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 6, 1926

Docket8 Div. 446.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 109 So. 117 (City of Albany v. Banks) 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

City of Albany v. Banks, 109 So. 117, 21 Ala. App. 411, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 174 (Ala. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The defendant, Robert Banks, was convicted in the mayor’s court of Albany for the violation of one of the ordinances of said cit£. From this conviction he appealed to the county court, where he was again convicted and fined $10 and costs, which he paid into court with the exception of $10 attorney’s fee, as is provided by ordinance to be paid in all cases in which appeals are taken from the mayor’s court to a state court. In said ordinance the $10 is required to be taxed as a part of the costs: “To be known and designated as ‘attorney’s fee,’ as a compensation to the city attorney for his services in trying said cases in said court (county court).” The trial court, on motion seasonably made, retaxed this item, and such action is here assigned as error.

Notwithstanding the broad and almost unlimited powers which have been granted to municipalities .in this state, extending to cases now governed by Standard Chemical & Oil Co. v. City of Troy, 201 Ala. 92, 77 So. 383, L. R. A. 1918C, 522, and while we have no disposition to take issue with any of the adjudicated cases, we know of no authority whereby municipalities may fix items of costs in county or circuit courts. That is what this $10 attorney’s fee is.

The ruling of the trial court was without error, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

SAMFORD, J.

The defendant, Robert Banks, was convicted in the mayor’s court of Albany for the violation of one of the ordinances of said cit£. From this conviction he appealed to the county court, where he was again convicted and fined $10 and costs, which he paid into court with the exception of $10 attorney’s fee, as is provided by ordinance to be paid in all cases in which appeals are taken from the mayor’s court to a state court. In said ordinance the $10 is required to be taxed as a part of the costs: “To be known and designated as ‘attorney’s fee,’ as a compensation to the city attorney for his services in trying said cases in said court (county court).” The trial court, on motion seasonably made, retaxed this item, and such action is here assigned as error.

Notwithstanding the broad and almost unlimited powers which have been granted to municipalities .in this state, extending to cases now governed by Standard Chemical & Oil Co. v. City of Troy, 201 Ala. 92, 77 So. 383, L. R. A. 1918C, 522, and while we have no disposition to take issue with any of the adjudicated cases, we know of no authority whereby municipalities may fix items of costs in county or circuit courts. That is what this $10 attorney’s fee is.

The ruling of the trial court was without error, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 So. 117, 21 Ala. App. 411, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-albany-v-banks-alactapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack