State v. Jackson

Supreme Court of Alabama

State v. Jackson

186 So. 2d 139, 279 Ala. 425, 1966 Ala. LEXIS 1036

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedMay 5, 1966

Docket1 Div. 315

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 186 So. 2d 139 (State v. Jackson) 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

State v. Jackson, 186 So. 2d 139, 279 Ala. 425, 1966 Ala. LEXIS 1036 (Ala. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

GOODWYN, Justice.

Eminent domain proceeding brought by the State (Code 1940, Tit. 19, Chap. 1) to acquire right-of-way for highway purposes.

The proceeding originated in the Mobile County probate court where there was an award of $7,000. From the order of condemnation there made, the State appealed to the circuit court of the county, where a trial de novo (§ 17, Tit. 19) was had before a jury. The sole issue on the trial was the amount of damages and compensation, if any, to be awarded the landowners. The jury fixed the amount at $8,-550. A judgment of condemnation followed. Thereupon, the State filed a motion for a new trial. The motion was overruled. This appeal was then brought by the State from the judgment of condemnation.

All of the assignments of error relate to, and have a bearing only upon, the amount to be awarded the landowners. But the amount of the award was not questioned in the trial court (in the motion for a new trial or otherwise), nor is it questioned here. *426 Accordingly, error; if there be error in any of the challenged rulings, is rendered harmless and cannot work a reversal. See: State v. Dunlap et ah, ante p. 418, 186 So.2d 132, and cases there cited.

The judgment of condemnation is due to be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

LIVINGSTON, C. J., and LAWSON, MERRILL and HARWOOD, JJ., concur. COLEMAN, J., dissents.

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

GOODWYN, Justice.

Eminent domain proceeding brought by the State (Code 1940, Tit. 19, Chap. 1) to acquire right-of-way for highway purposes.

The proceeding originated in the Mobile County probate court where there was an award of $7,000. From the order of condemnation there made, the State appealed to the circuit court of the county, where a trial de novo (§ 17, Tit. 19) was had before a jury. The sole issue on the trial was the amount of damages and compensation, if any, to be awarded the landowners. The jury fixed the amount at $8,-550. A judgment of condemnation followed. Thereupon, the State filed a motion for a new trial. The motion was overruled. This appeal was then brought by the State from the judgment of condemnation.

All of the assignments of error relate to, and have a bearing only upon, the amount to be awarded the landowners. But the amount of the award was not questioned in the trial court (in the motion for a new trial or otherwise), nor is it questioned here. *426 Accordingly, error; if there be error in any of the challenged rulings, is rendered harmless and cannot work a reversal. See: State v. Dunlap et ah, ante p. 418, 186 So.2d 132, and cases there cited.

The judgment of condemnation is due to be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

LIVINGSTON, C. J., and LAWSON, MERRILL and HARWOOD, JJ., concur. COLEMAN, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 So. 2d 139, 279 Ala. 425, 1966 Ala. LEXIS 1036, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jackson-ala-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack