Waltman v. Ortman

Alabama Court of Appeals

Waltman v. Ortman

170 So. 545, 27 Ala. App. 269, 1936 Ala. App. LEXIS 150

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 30, 1936

Docket1 Div. 240.

StatusPublished

This text of 170 So. 545 (Waltman v. Ortman) 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

Waltman v. Ortman, 170 So. 545, 27 Ala. App. 269, 1936 Ala. App. LEXIS 150 (Ala. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

The- controlling point of decision in this proceeding is identical with that which has been considered and determined by this court in the petition for writ of common-law certiorari in Edward P. Foley v. F. E. Armstrong, 170 So. 547, 1 wherein the writ was denied and the judgment of the circuit court affirmed. See Edward P. Foley v. F. E. Armstrong (Ala.App.) 170 So. 547.1 We there held that the act creating the inferior civil court of Mobile (Local Acts of Alabama 1911, p. 274) was a valid enactment, and not violative of the Constitution of Alabama 1901. In said proceeding, as here, a decision of this question was conclusive.

We see no necessity of again expressing our views and conclusion on this question.

Upon authority of Edward P. Foley v. F. E. Armstrong, supra, the writ in this proceeding is denied.

Writ denied.

1

Ante, p. 201.

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

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

The- controlling point of decision in this proceeding is identical with that which has been considered and determined by this court in the petition for writ of common-law certiorari in Edward P. Foley v. F. E. Armstrong, 170 So. 547, 1 wherein the writ was denied and the judgment of the circuit court affirmed. See Edward P. Foley v. F. E. Armstrong (Ala.App.) 170 So. 547.1 We there held that the act creating the inferior civil court of Mobile (Local Acts of Alabama 1911, p. 274) was a valid enactment, and not violative of the Constitution of Alabama 1901. In said proceeding, as here, a decision of this question was conclusive.

We see no necessity of again expressing our views and conclusion on this question.

Upon authority of Edward P. Foley v. F. E. Armstrong, supra, the writ in this proceeding is denied.

Writ denied.

1

Ante, p. 201.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 So. 545, 27 Ala. App. 269, 1936 Ala. App. LEXIS 150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waltman-v-ortman-alactapp-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack