Irwin v. Weil

153 So. 746, 228 Ala. 489, 1934 Ala. LEXIS 16

Opinion

THOMAS, Justice.

The trial was had by the court.without a jury, and judgment rendered for plaintiffSi

It may be said that the judgment was rendered on June 9, 1931; the appeal was tak en, and. security for costs given and' approved on May 11, 1932; and the question of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal is presented. Section 6127, Code; Colbert County v. Tennessee Valley Bank, 225 Ala. 632, 144 So. 803; Hildebrand v. First Nat. Bank of Fairfield, 221 Ala. 216, 128 So. 219; Collins Paving Co. v. Holseapple, 221 Ala. 308, 128 So. 599; Thompson v. State ex rel. Reeves, 216 Ala. 348, 113 So. 296; City of Troy v. Murphree, 214 Ala. 118, 107 So. 83.

The appeal, taken after the time prescribed by statute, will be dismissed ex mero motu, because this court is without jurisdiction to consider same. Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928; Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 So. 576; Bickley v. Hays, 183 Ala. 506, 62 So. 767.

Appeal dismissed.

ANDERSON, C. X, and BROWN and KNIGHT, XL, concur.