Draper v. City of Decatur

Alabama Court of Appeals

Draper v. City of Decatur

16 So. 2d 803, 31 Ala. App. 328, 1944 Ala. App. LEXIS 294

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 22, 1944

Docket8 Div. 404.

StatusPublished

This text of 16 So. 2d 803 (Draper v. City of Decatur) 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

Draper v. City of Decatur, 16 So. 2d 803, 31 Ala. App. 328, 1944 Ala. App. LEXIS 294 (Ala. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

This appeal is on the record without a bill of exceptions. The only question raised *329 by the appellant is whether or not the Court committed reversible error in overruling the appellant’s demurrer to the affidavit on which the' warrant of arrest was issued. The only ground of demurrer urged by the appellant is that the affidavit does not charge the defendant with having in her possession prohibited .liquor contrary to law. The appellant urges that the words “contrary to law” are indispensable. The affidavit did contain the words “in violation of an ordinance duly passed by the Mayor and Council of the City of Decatur, a municipal corporation.”

The point of decision above referred to is a mere quibble and without semblance of merit. The action of the court in overruling the demurrers of appellant to the affidavit was correct, hence no error appears.

No extended discussion is deemed necessary. We merely refer to the case of Rosenberg v. City of Selma, 168 Ala. 195, 52 So. 742, as being direct authority and conclusive of the sole point of decision upon this appeal.

Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

This appeal is on the record without a bill of exceptions. The only question raised *329 by the appellant is whether or not the Court committed reversible error in overruling the appellant’s demurrer to the affidavit on which the' warrant of arrest was issued. The only ground of demurrer urged by the appellant is that the affidavit does not charge the defendant with having in her possession prohibited .liquor contrary to law. The appellant urges that the words “contrary to law” are indispensable. The affidavit did contain the words “in violation of an ordinance duly passed by the Mayor and Council of the City of Decatur, a municipal corporation.”

The point of decision above referred to is a mere quibble and without semblance of merit. The action of the court in overruling the demurrers of appellant to the affidavit was correct, hence no error appears.

No extended discussion is deemed necessary. We merely refer to the case of Rosenberg v. City of Selma, 168 Ala. 195, 52 So. 742, as being direct authority and conclusive of the sole point of decision upon this appeal.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 So. 2d 803, 31 Ala. App. 328, 1944 Ala. App. LEXIS 294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/draper-v-city-of-decatur-alactapp-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack