Meyers v. Martinez

50 So. 351, 162 Ala. 562, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 404
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJune 30, 1909
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 50 So. 351 (Meyers v. Martinez) 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
Meyers v. Martinez, 50 So. 351, 162 Ala. 562, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 404 (Ala. 1909).

Opinion

MAYFIELD, J.

A motion was made in the lower •court to dismiss the bill for want of jurisdiction appearing on the face of the bill. The motion was overruled, and from that order this appeal is attempted. .

It is insisted by appellant that this is a plea to the jurisdiction, and that the order overruling the motion is a decree on the sufficiency of the plea, and will therefore support an appeal. This cannot be. A plea must deny or confess and avoid. The motion does neither. It was not set down for hearing on its sufficiency, and could not have been so set down, because it averred no facts to avoid, and did not deny any part of the bill. It is not a motion to dismiss for want of equity. The equity of the bill is not denied. The motion only denies the jurisdiction of the parties. There is no decree on demurrers. The order overruling the motion will- not support an appeal.

The question of a judgment or decree in the lower court which -will support an appeal is jurisdictional in this court, and cannot be waived, though all parties consent to and insist upon consideration and review in this court. We see no merit in the motion, but we cannot, and do not, so decide.

Appeal is dismissed.

Dowdeix, C. J., and Simpson and Denson, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Gray v. State Ex Rel. Attorney General
185 So. 2d 125 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1965)
Salvadore v. Howard
25 So. 2d 412 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1946)
Mitchell v. National Life Accident Ins. Co.
5 So. 2d 115 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1941)
Sanford v. Life Casualty Ins. Co. of Tennessee
156 So. 858 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1934)
Colbert County v. Tennessee Valley Bank
144 So. 803 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)
W. K. Syson Timber Co. v. State
123 So. 293 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1929)
State Ex Rel. Garrow v. Grayson
123 So. 573 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)
Bell v. King
98 So. 796 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924)
Clements v. Hodgens
98 So. 467 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1923)
Martin v. Alabama Power Co.
94 So. 76 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1922)
Boshell v. Phillips.
93 So. 576 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1922)
Lathrop Lumber Co. v. Pioneer Lumber Co.
93 So. 427 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1922)
Hardeman v. State
81 So. 656 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1919)
Wise v. Spears
76 So. 869 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1917)
Temple v. Dooley
71 So. 683 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1916)
Martinez v. Meyers
61 So. 810 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 So. 351, 162 Ala. 562, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meyers-v-martinez-ala-1909.