Stiles v. H. H. Lambert
This text of 94 So. 2d 788 (Stiles v. H. H. Lambert) 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.
Opinion
As we interpret the opinion of the Court of Appeals, based on the assignment of error which that court reviewed, the court reached a conclusion of fact. Since this appears to be true, this court will not review the finding of the Court of Appeals.
In Mutual Sav. Life Ins. Co. v. Osborne, 242 Ala. 589, 7 So.2d 319, 320, this court said:
“The case is here again on certiorari to review the opinion of the Court of Appeals affirming the order of the circuit court granting the plaintiff’s [185]*185motion for new trial, on grounds among others that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the great weight of the evidence. This ruling necessarily required a full review of the evidence, and a finding of facts from the evidence, and the judgment and conclusion of the Court of Appeals is not subject to review here.”
The result is that the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
94 So. 2d 788, 266 Ala. 184, 1957 Ala. LEXIS 410, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stiles-v-h-h-lambert-ala-1957.