Martin v. Alabama Power Co.

94 So. 76, 208 Ala. 212, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 457
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJune 22, 1922
Docket5 Div. 827.
StatusPublished
Cited by32 cases

This text of 94 So. 76 (Martin v. Alabama Power Co.) 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
Martin v. Alabama Power Co., 94 So. 76, 208 Ala. 212, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 457 (Ala. 1922).

Opinions

MILLER, J.

D. B. Martin brings this action against the Alabama Power Company to recover $100,000 damages, occasioned by an overflow of his lands by waters from the Alabama and Coosa rivers, alleged to have been caused by the defendant, destroying growing and gathered crops and livestock, of plaintiff on the land.

There are two counts in the complaint. The defendant filed a plea in abatement to each count. Demurrers of plaintiff were overruled by the court to the plea. The plaintiff took a nonsuit, and appealed from the judgment of the court. The judgment rendered by the court is as follows:

“This day. came the parties in this cause by their attorneys, and the .plaintiff filed his demurrers to the defendant’s plea in abatement in this cause. After hearing and understanding said demurrers it is considered by, and it is the judgment of, the court that said demurrers be and they are overruled. On account of the ruling of the court on said demurrers the plaintiff takes a nonsuit in this cause. It is therefore considered by, and it is the judgment of, the court that the defendant have and recover of the plaintiff the cost in this behalf expended, for which let execution issue.”

The appeal of plaintiff is based on that judgment. It is not final under section 2837, Code 1907. It is not sufficient to rest an appeal. The nonsuit is not granted by an order of the court. It should be. Lathrop Lumber *213 Co. v. Pioneer Lumber Co. (Ala. Sup.) 93 South. 427. 1 The complaint or cause is not dismissed hy an order of the court. It should be when a nonsuit is requested. Wright v. Kemp, 205 Ala. 201, 87 South. 836; Lathrop Lumber Co. v. Pioneer Lumber Co., supra. A judgment of the court overruling demurrers and taxing plaintiff with the court cost has been held not to be such a final judgment as will support an appeal. Eslava v. Jones, 79 Ala. 287. These are the only judgments of the court in this case. Wise v. Spears, 200 Ala. 095, 76 South. 869. There should be an order of the court overruling the demurrers, granting the nonsuit, dismissing the case, and taxing the'cost, permitting execution therefor to issue if not paid. Lathrop Lumber Co. v. Pioneer Lumber Co., supra. There is no judgment of the court granting the nonsuit and dismissing the case. This was necessary to make this judgment final. Lathrop Lumber Co. v. Pioneer Lumber Co., supra; Wright v. Kemp, 205 Ala. 201, 87 South. 836; Wise v. Spears, 200 Ala. 695, 76 South. 869; Eslava v. Jones, 79 Ala. 287.

The matter is jurisdictional. It cannot he waived. The judgment will not support an appeal. We must dismiss the appeal ex mero motu; and it is so ordered hy .the court. Wise v. Spears, 200 Ala. 695, 76 South. 869; Lathrop Lumber Co. v. Pioneer Lumber Co., supra; Meyers v. Martinez, 162 Ala. 562, 50 South. 351.

Appeal dismissed.

ANDERSON, O. J., and SAYRE and •GARDNER, JJ., concur.
1

207 Ala. 522.

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

Related

Campbell v. Water Wks. Gas Bd. of Town of Red Bay
274 So. 2d 313 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1973)
Blackford v. Jefferson Specialties, Inc.
238 So. 2d 706 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1970)
Ivey v. Dixon Investment Company
219 So. 2d 639 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1969)
Stephens v. Stephens
189 So. 2d 782 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1966)
Moss v. Upchurch
179 So. 2d 741 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1965)
Bradford v. Engelhardt
160 So. 2d 485 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1964)
Mason v. McClain
122 So. 2d 519 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1959)
Carter v. City of Gadsden
88 So. 2d 689 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1955)
Cooper v. City of Fairhope
83 So. 2d 321 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1955)
Townsend v. McCall
78 So. 2d 310 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1955)
McPeters v. White
12 So. 2d 568 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1943)
Thomas v. White
12 So. 2d 567 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1943)
Mitchell v. National Life Accident Ins. Co.
5 So. 2d 115 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1941)
Mobile Cigar & Tobacco Co. v. Dees
194 So. 419 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1940)
Huie v. Smith
189 So. 729 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1939)
Harris v. Barber
186 So. 160 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1939)
Gentry v. Swann Chemical Co.
174 So. 530 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1937)
Deal v. Camden Fire Ins. Co.
160 So. 225 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1935)
Dumas v. Hollins
154 So. 781 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1934)
Webb v. French
144 So. 818 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
94 So. 76, 208 Ala. 212, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-alabama-power-co-ala-1922.