Morgan v. Flexner & Lichten

105 Ala. 356
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1894·Published·Cited by 18 cases

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

Motions were made by A. L, Morgan in the circuit court to set aside a judgment rendered some years previously in that court on the ground that said judgment was void, and also to quash and set aside a venditioni exponas issued upon said alleged void judgment a short time before the motions were made. At the end of these motions as copied into the transcript is the following: “16 Refused, and movant excepts and is given 40 days from adjournment of court to present bill of exceptions. Hubbard, Judge.” This entry obviously copied from the trial docket is assumed by the appellant to be a judgment of the court overruling and denying his motion's, and from it as such this appeal is prosecuted. But it is not a judgment, but only a docket memorandum of the presiding judge, intended and operating merely as a. direction to the clerk as to what j udgment should be entered on the records of the court. It may never have been acted on by the clerk, and will not support an appeal or an assignment of error.— Baker v. Swift, 87 Ala. 530; Park v. Lide, 90 Ala. 246.

The motion to dismiss the appeal must, therefore, prevail.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Morgan v. Flexner & Lichten, 105 Ala. 356 (Ala. 1894).

105 Ala. 356 (Morgan v. Flexner & Lichten) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ex Parte Brandon
11 So. 2d 561 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1943)
McCollough v. Parks
199 So. 750 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1941)
Mt. Vernon-Woodberry Mills v. Union Springs Guano Co.
155 So. 716 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1934)
Meador-Pasley Co. v. Owen
133 So. 35 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1931)
State v. Scott, County Com'r.
247 P. 699 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1926)
Langston v. Louisville & N. R.
108 So. 379 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
Neal v. Fuqua
92 So. 468 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1922)
De Bardeleben v. State
77 So. 979 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1918)
Lockwood v. Thompson
73 So. 504 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1916)
Hall v. First Bank
72 So. 171 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1916)
Edwards v. Davenport
66 So. 878 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1914)
McLaughlin v. Beyer
61 So. 62 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1913)
McSwean v. State
57 So. 732 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1912)
Wynn v. McCraney
46 So. 854 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1908)
Ferrell v. City of Opelika
39 So. 249 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1905)
Kennedy v. Citizens' National Bank
93 N.W. 71 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1903)
Brightman & Co. v. Merriwether
121 Ala. 602 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1898)
McDonald v. Alabama Midland Railway Co.
123 Ala. 227 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1898)