North Birmingham Trust & Savings Bank v. Sessions

127 So. 163, 220 Ala. 594, 1930 Ala. LEXIS 66
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided March 20, 1930·No. 4 Div. 471.·Published

Opinion

BROWN, J.

, This appeal is prosecuted from an order of the circuit court denying the appellant’s motion to substitute lost record in a pending cause, authorized by § 10137 of the Code (1923).

There is no assignment of errors on the record, and in the absence thereof nothing is presented for review. Redd Chemical & Nitrate Co. v. W. T. Clay Mercantile Co., et al., 219 Ala. 478, 122 So. 652; Nichols v. Hardegree, 202 Ala. 132, 79 So. 598.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE and FOSTER, JJ., concur.

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

North Birmingham Trust & Savings Bank v. Sessions, 127 So. 163, 220 Ala. 594, 1930 Ala. LEXIS 66 (Ala. 1930).

127 So. 163 (North Birmingham Trust & Savings Bank v. Sessions) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nichols v. Hardegree
79 So. 598 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1918)
Redd Chemical & Nitrate Co. v. W. T. Clay Mercantile Co.
122 So. 652 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)