Ex parte City of Mobile
This text of 217 So. 2d 53 (Ex parte City of Mobile) 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.
Opinion
The petition for a writ of mandamus, or in the alternative for a writ of prohibition directed to Judge Mayhall must be denied. The petition for the writ of mandamus must be denied since mandamus is not available as a substitute for appeal. Denson v. First National Bank of Birmingham, 276 Ala. 146, 159 So.2d 849.
The petition for writ of prohibition must be denied because it has not been shown to this court that Judge Mayhall lacked jurisdiction to grant the temporary restraining order. “* * * errors or irregularities in court procedure cannot be corrected by a writ of prohibition.” Ex parte Connor, 240 Ala. 327, 198 So. 850. Petitioners still have the remedy of appeal, if seasonably sought and perfected.
Denial of these writs obviously does not express any view of this court as to whether the motion picture “The Fox” does or does not violate obscenity ordinances of the City of Mobile.
Writs denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
217 So. 2d 53, 283 Ala. 341, 1968 Ala. LEXIS 1042, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-city-of-mobile-ala-1968.