Stedham v. Robertson

Alabama Court of Appeals

Stedham v. Robertson

71 So. 62, 14 Ala. App. 619, 1915 Ala. App. LEXIS 304

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 14, 1915

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 71 So. 62 (Stedham v. Robertson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stedham v. Robertson, 71 So. 62, 14 Ala. App. 619, 1915 Ala. App. LEXIS 304 (Ala. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

PELHAM, P. J.

The conclusions of the court on the facts, and the judgment rendered thereon, when the case is tried before the judge without the intervention of a jury, should not be disturbed on review, if the judgment rendered can be supported by the evidence.—Montgomery Lodge v. Massie, 159 Ala. 437, 49 South. 231; Minchener, et al. v. Robinson, 169 Ala. 472, 53 South. 749; Kelly v. City of Anniston, 164 Ala. 631, 51 South. 415; McIntyre Lumber & Export Co. v. Jackson Lumber Co., 165 Ala. 268, 51 South. 767, 138 Am. St. Rep. 66; Millner v. State, 150 Ala. 95, 43 South. 194.

An examination of the evidence set out in the record shows a conflict that the court, having the witness before it, decided in favor of the defendant. We cannot undertake to review the action of the court in passing on conflicting evidence, consisting of the oral testimony of witnesses the court had the advantage of personally observing on the witness stand. Beyond a doubt there was sufficient evidence to support the judgment rendered, [621]*621and the credibility of the evidence was a matter for the trial court. — Authorities supra. The only error assigned on the appeal is the action of the circuit court in rendering judgment in favor of the defendant on the evidence.

Affirmed.

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

PELHAM, P. J.

The conclusions of the court on the facts, and the judgment rendered thereon, when the case is tried before the judge without the intervention of a jury, should not be disturbed on review, if the judgment rendered can be supported by the evidence.—Montgomery Lodge v. Massie, 159 Ala. 437, 49 South. 231; Minchener, et al. v. Robinson, 169 Ala. 472, 53 South. 749; Kelly v. City of Anniston, 164 Ala. 631, 51 South. 415; McIntyre Lumber & Export Co. v. Jackson Lumber Co., 165 Ala. 268, 51 South. 767, 138 Am. St. Rep. 66; Millner v. State, 150 Ala. 95, 43 South. 194.

An examination of the evidence set out in the record shows a conflict that the court, having the witness before it, decided in favor of the defendant. We cannot undertake to review the action of the court in passing on conflicting evidence, consisting of the oral testimony of witnesses the court had the advantage of personally observing on the witness stand. Beyond a doubt there was sufficient evidence to support the judgment rendered, [621]*621and the credibility of the evidence was a matter for the trial court. — Authorities supra. The only error assigned on the appeal is the action of the circuit court in rendering judgment in favor of the defendant on the evidence.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 So. 62, 14 Ala. App. 619, 1915 Ala. App. LEXIS 304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stedham-v-robertson-alactapp-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack