Jasper Land Co. v. Riddlesperger

Alabama Court of Appeals

Jasper Land Co. v. Riddlesperger

140 So. 624, 25 Ala. App. 45, 1932 Ala. App. LEXIS 59

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided March 22, 1932·No. 6 Div. 215.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

RICE, J.

“A judgment should be complete and certain in itself.” Sugar Valley Land Co. et al. v. Johnson, 17 Ala. App. 409, 85 So. 871, 874, and authorities cited in the opinion in that ease.

The judgment rendered in this case violates the above rule, and, ■ for that reason, must be reversed.

As the ease must be retried, and the evidence may be supplemented, we deem it profit *46 less to undertake to' decide whether or not, upon the evidence in the hill of exceptions, judgment in favor of appellee was warranted.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

RICE, J.

“A judgment should be complete and certain in itself.” Sugar Valley Land Co. et al. v. Johnson, 17 Ala. App. 409, 85 So. 871, 874, and authorities cited in the opinion in that ease.

The judgment rendered in this case violates the above rule, and, ■ for that reason, must be reversed.

As the ease must be retried, and the evidence may be supplemented, we deem it profit *46 less to undertake to' decide whether or not, upon the evidence in the hill of exceptions, judgment in favor of appellee was warranted.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Jasper Land Co. v. Riddlesperger, 140 So. 624, 25 Ala. App. 45, 1932 Ala. App. LEXIS 59 (Ala. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

140 So. 624 (Jasper Land Co. v. Riddlesperger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related