Ex Parte Mobile Light R. Co.

75 So. 940, 200 Ala. 192, 1917 Ala. LEXIS 367
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided May 31, 1917·No. 1 Div. 981.·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

SAYRE, J.

[1, 2] This application having been submitted to the whole court, it is adjudged and ordered that the petition be dismissed for the reason that it was not filed within 15 days of the overruling of petitioner’s application for rehearing in the Court of Appeals as required by rule 42 (175 Ala. xx). The court is of opinion that the act of September 15, 1915 (Acts, p. 606), has no effect upon the operation of the rule.

‘The writer, considering beforehand' and doubting the propriety of .the decision thus established (for which reason he brought the case to a conference of all the judges), had prepared an opinion on the meritorious question presented by the petition, and, sustaining the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeals, preferred to put the result on that ground. He now acquiesces in the court’s disposition of the matter.

Petition for certiorari dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Ex Parte Mobile Light R. Co., 75 So. 940, 200 Ala. 192, 1917 Ala. LEXIS 367 (Ala. 1917).

75 So. 940 (Ex Parte Mobile Light R. Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thompson v. State ex rel. Borders
107 So. 2d 890 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1958)
Morrow v. State
97 So. 2d 547 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1957)
Ex Parte Ewart-Brewer Motor Co.
99 So. 836 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924)