Stokes v. Hart

Supreme Court of Alabama

Stokes v. Hart

139 So. 2d 300, 273 Ala. 279, 1962 Ala. LEXIS 333

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedMarch 22, 1962

Docket4 Div. 72

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 139 So. 2d 300 (Stokes v. Hart) 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

Stokes v. Hart, 139 So. 2d 300, 273 Ala. 279, 1962 Ala. LEXIS 333 (Ala. 1962).

Pincite

Opinions

LAWSON, Justice.

This is a boundary line dispute between appellees, as .complainants, and appellant, as respondent. There was a decree adopting the contention of complainants. Respondent has appealed.

Submission here was on appellees’ motion to dismiss the appeal and on the merits.

Motion to Dismiss the Appeal

Appellees assert that the appeal should be dismissed in that the decree from which the appeal is sought to be taken is not a final decree.

There is no merit in this insistence. The decree fixes the boundary line between the lands of the complainants and the respondent as a certain section line. The fact that a surveyor was directed to make a survey to determine the exact location of the section line and to erect certain judicial landmarks at designated points does not infect the decree with interlocutory characteristics of the decree held insufficient to support an appeal in the case of Tanner v. Dobbins, 251 Ala. 392, 37 So.2d 520.

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

LAWSON, Justice.

This is a boundary line dispute between appellees, as .complainants, and appellant, as respondent. There was a decree adopting the contention of complainants. Respondent has appealed.

Submission here was on appellees’ motion to dismiss the appeal and on the merits.

Motion to Dismiss the Appeal

Appellees assert that the appeal should be dismissed in that the decree from which the appeal is sought to be taken is not a final decree.

There is no merit in this insistence. The decree fixes the boundary line between the lands of the complainants and the respondent as a certain section line. The fact that a surveyor was directed to make a survey to determine the exact location of the section line and to erect certain judicial landmarks at designated points does not infect the decree with interlocutory characteristics of the decree held insufficient to support an appeal in the case of Tanner v. Dobbins, 251 Ala. 392, 37 So.2d 520.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 So. 2d 300, 273 Ala. 279, 1962 Ala. LEXIS 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stokes-v-hart-ala-1962.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack