Tri-State Auto Auction v. Crouch

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Tri-State Auto Auction v. Crouch

475 So. 2d 877

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedAugust 21, 1985

DocketCiv. 4727

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 475 So. 2d 877 (Tri-State Auto Auction v. Crouch) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tri-State Auto Auction v. Crouch, 475 So. 2d 877 (Ala. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

The plaintiffs' Rule 59, A.R.Civ.P., motion was overruled by operation of Rule 59.1, and more than forty-two days thereafter having expired before the plaintiffs filed their notice of appeal, we do not have jurisdiction over the appeal and are left with no alternative but to dismiss it ex mero motu. Rule 2 (a)(1), A.R.A.P.; State v. Wall, 348 So.2d 482 (Ala. 1977);Haynes v. Haynes,470 So.2d 1274 (Ala.Civ.App. 1985); Olson v.Olson, 367 So.2d 504 (Ala.Civ.App. 1979).

The foregoing opinion was prepared by retired Circuit Judge EDWARD N. SCRUGGS, serving on active duty status as a judge of this court under the provisions of § 12-18-10 (e) of the Code of Alabama 1975, and this opinion is hereby adopted as that of this court.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

All the Judges concur.

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

The plaintiffs' Rule 59, A.R.Civ.P., motion was overruled by operation of Rule 59.1, and more than forty-two days thereafter having expired before the plaintiffs filed their notice of appeal, we do not have jurisdiction over the appeal and are left with no alternative but to dismiss it ex mero motu. Rule 2 (a)(1), A.R.A.P.; State v. Wall, 348 So.2d 482 (Ala. 1977);Haynes v. Haynes,470 So.2d 1274 (Ala.Civ.App. 1985); Olson v.Olson, 367 So.2d 504 (Ala.Civ.App. 1979).

The foregoing opinion was prepared by retired Circuit Judge EDWARD N. SCRUGGS, serving on active duty status as a judge of this court under the provisions of § 12-18-10 (e) of the Code of Alabama 1975, and this opinion is hereby adopted as that of this court.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

475 So. 2d 877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tri-state-auto-auction-v-crouch-alacivapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack