State Ex Rel. Holcombe v. Stone

168 So. 554, 232 Ala. 458, 1936 Ala. LEXIS 263
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State Ex Rel. Holcombe v. Stone. Read the opinion of the Court — 232 Ala. 16
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided May 28, 1936·No. 1 Div. 904.·Published

Opinion

BOULDIN, Justice.

Appellant instituted a mandamus proceeding against appellee to compel the registration of a warrant issued to appellant by the board of revenue and road commissioners of Mobile county.

*459 Demurrers to the amended petition being sustained, the plaintiff, because of adverse rulings on the pleadings, took a non'suit. Thereupon, it was “ordered and adjudged by the court that the defendant go hence without delay and have and recover * * * costs,” etc.

Appellee here files a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that it was not taken within the time prescribed by law.

The final judgment was rendered June. 29, 1935, and the appeal taken October 25-, 1935.

The limitation for such appeal is thirty days. Code, § 8980; Fountain, Judge of Probate, v. State ex rel. Hybart et al., 208 Ala. 480, 94 So. 66; Mayfield et al. v. Court of County Com’rs Tuscaloosa County, 148 Ala. 548, 41 So. 932.

The appeal must, therefore, be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

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

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

State Ex Rel. Holcombe v. Stone, 168 So. 554, 232 Ala. 458, 1936 Ala. LEXIS 263 (Ala. 1936).

168 So. 554 (State Ex Rel. Holcombe v. Stone) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fountain v. State Ex Rel. Hybart
94 So. 66 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1922)
Mayfield v. Court of County Com. Tuscaloosa County
41 So. 932 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1906)