Jones v. Jones

Supreme Court of Alabama

Jones v. Jones

31 So. 2d 81, 249 Ala. 374, 1947 Ala. LEXIS 368

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedMay 8, 1947

Docket6 Div. 460.

StatusPublished

Cited by16 cases

This text of 31 So. 2d 81 (Jones v. Jones) 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.

Bluebook

Jones v. Jones, 31 So. 2d 81, 249 Ala. 374, 1947 Ala. LEXIS 368 (Ala. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

LIVINGSTON, Justice.

This is an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court, in Equity, of Jefferson County, Alabama, adjudging Robert Jones in contempt of court for his failure or refusal to pay an award for separate maintenance to his wife in accordance with the decree of that court. Appellant also on submission prayed for the alternative writ of mandamus in the event the appeal was found not to be the proper remedy.

It has long been the rule in this jurisdiction that contempt proceedings are not reviewable by appeal ttnder our statutes. The remedy is by certiorari. Easton v. State, 39 Ala. 551, 87 Am.Dec. 49; Ex parte Dickens, 162 Ala. 272, 50 So. 218; Alabama Power Co. v. Adams, 191 Ala. 54, 67 So. 838, Ann.Cas.1917C, 878; Board of Revenue of Covington County v. Merrill, 193 Ala. 521, 542, 68 So. 971; Preskitt v. Chandler, 214 Ala. 278, 107 So. 750; Bankston v. Lakeman, 219 Ala. 508, 122 So. 819; Pope v. State, 229 Ala. 643, 159 So. 51.

The writ of mandamus is an extraordinary legal remedy grantable only when petitioner shows a clear, specific legal right for the enforcement of which there is no other adequate remedy. Poyner v. Whiddon, 234 Ala. 168, 174 So. 507. It will not lie for the mere purpose of review. Ex parte Hartwell, 238 Ala. 62, 188 So. 891. Certiorari affords appellant petitioner an adequate remedy, and is the only available remedy to review the action of the trial court in a civil contempt proceeding.

The appeal is dismissed, and the writ of mandamus is denied.

Appeal dismissed: mandamus denied.

All the Justices concur.

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

LIVINGSTON, Justice.

This is an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court, in Equity, of Jefferson County, Alabama, adjudging Robert Jones in contempt of court for his failure or refusal to pay an award for separate maintenance to his wife in accordance with the decree of that court. Appellant also on submission prayed for the alternative writ of mandamus in the event the appeal was found not to be the proper remedy.

It has long been the rule in this jurisdiction that contempt proceedings are not reviewable by appeal ttnder our statutes. The remedy is by certiorari. Easton v. State, 39 Ala. 551, 87 Am.Dec. 49; Ex parte Dickens, 162 Ala. 272, 50 So. 218; Alabama Power Co. v. Adams, 191 Ala. 54, 67 So. 838, Ann.Cas.1917C, 878; Board of Revenue of Covington County v. Merrill, 193 Ala. 521, 542, 68 So. 971; Preskitt v. Chandler, 214 Ala. 278, 107 So. 750; Bankston v. Lakeman, 219 Ala. 508, 122 So. 819; Pope v. State, 229 Ala. 643, 159 So. 51.

The writ of mandamus is an extraordinary legal remedy grantable only when petitioner shows a clear, specific legal right for the enforcement of which there is no other adequate remedy. Poyner v. Whiddon, 234 Ala. 168, 174 So. 507. It will not lie for the mere purpose of review. Ex parte Hartwell, 238 Ala. 62, 188 So. 891. Certiorari affords appellant petitioner an adequate remedy, and is the only available remedy to review the action of the trial court in a civil contempt proceeding.

The appeal is dismissed, and the writ of mandamus is denied.

Appeal dismissed: mandamus denied.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 So. 2d 81, 249 Ala. 374, 1947 Ala. LEXIS 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-jones-ala-1947.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack