Snider v. Funderburk

96 So. 928, 209 Ala. 663, 1923 Ala. LEXIS 605
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJune 14, 1923
Docket3 Div. 593.
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 96 So. 928 (Snider v. Funderburk) 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
Snider v. Funderburk, 96 So. 928, 209 Ala. 663, 1923 Ala. LEXIS 605 (Ala. 1923).

Opinion

MILLER, J.

S. D. Snider filed this bill in equity on January 3, 1920, against Frances E. Funderburk. The defendant on January 22, 1920, filed demurrers to the bill of complaint, and on March 31, 1922, the defendant filed additional demurrers to it. On June 1, 1922, the court by decree sustained the demurrers of the defendant to the bill of complaint. The bill of complaint was not dismissed by the court; the decree simply sustained the demurrers to it. On November 29, 1922, the complainant appealed from that decree, gave security on that date for cost of appeal, which was approved by the register on November 29, 1922.

The decree sustaining demurrers to the bill of complaint is assigned as error. It was submitted in this court on June 7, 1923. Can we consider it? No, the appeal must be dismissed. It was properly taken by giving security for cost (Gen. Acts 1915, p. 711, approved September 22, 1915, amended Gen. Acts 1919, p. 84), but it' was taken on November 29, 1922, from a decree rendered June 1, 1922, sustaining demurrers to the bill of complaint. This was more than 30 days after the decree was rendered. Appeals from decree sustaining demurrers to a bill of complaint must be taken within 30 days after the renditiqn of such decree. Section 2838, Code 1907, amended Gen. Acts 1915, p. 137; Minge v. Smith, 206 Ala. 330, 89 South. 473.

This appeal was taken too late from that decree. We have no jurisdiction to consider it. It must be dismissed. Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 South. 576; Bickley v. Hays, 183 Ala. 506, 62 South. 767.

The appeal is dismissed.

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

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

Related

Thompson v. Department of Industrial Relations
264 So. 2d 528 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1972)
Gray v. State Ex Rel. Attorney General
185 So. 2d 125 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1965)
Key v. Dozier
64 So. 2d 69 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1953)
Irwin v. Weil
153 So. 746 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1934)
Hildebrand v. First Nat. Bank of Fairfield
128 So. 219 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1930)
Stough v. New York Life Ins. Co.
115 So. 155 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1928)
Thomas v. Thomas
107 So. 810 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
City of Troy v. Murphree
107 So. 83 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
Lewis v. Martin
98 So. 635 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 So. 928, 209 Ala. 663, 1923 Ala. LEXIS 605, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snider-v-funderburk-ala-1923.