City of Birmingham v. Hawkins

194 So. 538, 239 Ala. 9, 1940 Ala. LEXIS 76

Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided January 11, 1940·No. 6 Div. 550.·Published

Opinion

GARDNER, Justice.

Upon the question of substantive law, this cause is ruled by Eugene H. Hawkins v. City of Birmingham, post, p. 185, 194 So. 533, this day decided.

Upon the matter of remedy, the holding was that prohibition would lie.

As a consequence, the learned trial judge correctly ruled the present bill was without equity, and his decree will accordingly be here affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and BOULDIN and FOSTER, JJ., concur.

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

GARDNER, Justice.

Upon the question of substantive law, this cause is ruled by Eugene H. Hawkins v. City of Birmingham, post, p. 185, 194 So. 533, this day decided.

Upon the matter of remedy, the holding was that prohibition would lie.

As a consequence, the learned trial judge correctly ruled the present bill was without equity, and his decree will accordingly be here affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and BOULDIN and FOSTER, JJ., concur.

City of Birmingham v. Hawkins, 194 So. 538, 239 Ala. 9, 1940 Ala. LEXIS 76 (Ala. 1940).

Pincite

194 So. 538 (City of Birmingham v. Hawkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.