King v. Garrett

Supreme Court of Alabama

King v. Garrett

613 So. 2d 1283, 1993 WL 47837

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedFebruary 26, 1993

Docket1911756

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 613 So. 2d 1283 (King v. Garrett) 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

King v. Garrett, 613 So. 2d 1283, 1993 WL 47837 (Ala. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Lopaka Lewis King appeals, pro se, from the trial court's dismissal of his complaint against James S. Garrett, a circuit judge in Jefferson County. The record King designated contains the case action summary sheet but does not contain the complaint or any other pleadings or evidence considered by the trial court. This Court is limited to a review of the record alone. Sheetz, Aiken Aiken v. Louverdrape, Inc.,514 So.2d 797, 801 (Ala. 1987); *Page 1284 see also Allred v. Shirley, 598 So.2d 1347, 1348 (Ala. 1992). If the record does not contain the matter or materials considered by the trial court, then this Court has no basis upon which to review the trial court's judgment. Smith v. Smith, 596 So.2d 1 (Ala. 1992). The judgment of dismissal is, therefore, affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and SHORES, HOUSTON and KENNEDY, JJ., concur.

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

Lopaka Lewis King appeals, pro se, from the trial court's dismissal of his complaint against James S. Garrett, a circuit judge in Jefferson County. The record King designated contains the case action summary sheet but does not contain the complaint or any other pleadings or evidence considered by the trial court. This Court is limited to a review of the record alone. Sheetz, Aiken Aiken v. Louverdrape, Inc.,514 So.2d 797, 801 (Ala. 1987); *Page 1284 see also Allred v. Shirley, 598 So.2d 1347, 1348 (Ala. 1992). If the record does not contain the matter or materials considered by the trial court, then this Court has no basis upon which to review the trial court's judgment. Smith v. Smith, 596 So.2d 1 (Ala. 1992). The judgment of dismissal is, therefore, affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and SHORES, HOUSTON and KENNEDY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

613 So. 2d 1283, 1993 WL 47837, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-garrett-ala-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack