Landers v. Moore

Alabama Court of Appeals

Landers v. Moore

111 So. 898, 22 Ala. App. 20, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 2

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 1, 1927

Docket4 Div. 254.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 111 So. 898 (Landers v. Moore) 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

Landers v. Moore, 111 So. 898, 22 Ala. App. 20, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 2 (Ala. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

This is the second appeal in this case. The facts on this appeal are substantially the same as on the former appeal. Both appellant and appellee insist that the facts differ, in that each side claims to have strengthened its cause by additional facts; but we find the facts to be 'substantially as set out in Landers v. Moore, 21 Ala. App. 12, 106 So. 223.

The foregoing being true, the law of this case is settled by the decision of this court in Landers v. Moore, supra, and of the Supreme Court in Ex parte Landers, 214 Ala. 20, 106 So. 225. For the above reason, we need not look for other authority or pursue the inquiry further.

With the law of the case declared as it was and considered by the judge trying the case, his conclusions from the evidence were against appellant’s contention that there had been an abandonment of the levy. As to this, also, we are not left without a decision of the Supreme Court. The judgment of the trial court having been based upon substantially the same evidence, upon which a new trial was granted in the former appeal, and that judgment having been there upheld by this court and the Supreme Court, we cannot now disturb it.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

SAMFORD, J.

This is the second appeal in this case. The facts on this appeal are substantially the same as on the former appeal. Both appellant and appellee insist that the facts differ, in that each side claims to have strengthened its cause by additional facts; but we find the facts to be 'substantially as set out in Landers v. Moore, 21 Ala. App. 12, 106 So. 223.

The foregoing being true, the law of this case is settled by the decision of this court in Landers v. Moore, supra, and of the Supreme Court in Ex parte Landers, 214 Ala. 20, 106 So. 225. For the above reason, we need not look for other authority or pursue the inquiry further.

With the law of the case declared as it was and considered by the judge trying the case, his conclusions from the evidence were against appellant’s contention that there had been an abandonment of the levy. As to this, also, we are not left without a decision of the Supreme Court. The judgment of the trial court having been based upon substantially the same evidence, upon which a new trial was granted in the former appeal, and that judgment having been there upheld by this court and the Supreme Court, we cannot now disturb it.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 So. 898, 22 Ala. App. 20, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 2, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/landers-v-moore-alactapp-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack