Harris v. Dover

Alabama Court of Appeals

Harris v. Dover

155 So. 887, 26 Ala. App. 220, 1934 Ala. App. LEXIS 112

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 30, 1934

Docket6 Div. 665.

StatusPublished

This text of 155 So. 887 (Harris v. Dover) 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

Harris v. Dover, 155 So. 887, 26 Ala. App. 220, 1934 Ala. App. LEXIS 112 (Ala. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

On the trial of this ease in the lower court, judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff (appellee); being dissatisfied with said judgment on account of its alleged insufficiency as to amount of recovery, the plaintiff in due time made and entered a motion seeking to have the judgment set aside and a new trial granted in the court 'below. Due and legal notice of said motion was served upon the adverse party and the motion was duly brought to the attention of the court, and was, by the court, set down on a given date for hearing. It appears from the record and motion filed in this court that subsequent to the foregoing and while said motion for a new trial was pending, the appellants filed an appeal bond seeking to appeal to this court. Certificate of appeal was forwarded and the case docketed in this court. The motion now under consideration is to dismiss the appeal. It affirmatively appearing that the attempted appeal was premature, the case still legally pending in the lower court, said motion to dismiss is hereby granted and the purported appeal is dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

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

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

On the trial of this ease in the lower court, judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff (appellee); being dissatisfied with said judgment on account of its alleged insufficiency as to amount of recovery, the plaintiff in due time made and entered a motion seeking to have the judgment set aside and a new trial granted in the court 'below. Due and legal notice of said motion was served upon the adverse party and the motion was duly brought to the attention of the court, and was, by the court, set down on a given date for hearing. It appears from the record and motion filed in this court that subsequent to the foregoing and while said motion for a new trial was pending, the appellants filed an appeal bond seeking to appeal to this court. Certificate of appeal was forwarded and the case docketed in this court. The motion now under consideration is to dismiss the appeal. It affirmatively appearing that the attempted appeal was premature, the case still legally pending in the lower court, said motion to dismiss is hereby granted and the purported appeal is dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 So. 887, 26 Ala. App. 220, 1934 Ala. App. LEXIS 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-dover-alactapp-1934.