West v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

West v. State

6 So. 2d 436, 242 Ala. 369, 1942 Ala. LEXIS 50

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedJanuary 22, 1942

Docket8 Div. 168.

StatusPublished

Cited by15 cases

This text of 6 So. 2d 436 (West v. State) 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

West v. State, 6 So. 2d 436, 242 Ala. 369, 1942 Ala. LEXIS 50 (Ala. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

GARDNER, Chief Justice.

Section 23, Gen.Acts 1935, p. 632, Code 1940, Tit. 8, § 21, expressly declares that the rules and regulations therein referred to, and mentioned in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, “shall have the force and effect of law”. That means very clearly the force and effect of a general law, a public statute.

“Where an act at the time of its passage is declared * * * to be a public statute, such declaration is equivalent to enacting that it be judicially noticed, for though local in its application, such a clause will establish it as a public statute and place it within the circle of the judicial knowledge of the court”. 20 Amer.Jur. 60.

The text is supported by the cited authority of Case v. Kelly, 133 U.S. 21, 10 S.Ct. 216, 33 L.Ed. 513. See also 23 C.J. 1897 upon the question of judicial notice and illustrations to be found.

The affidavit, therefore, correctly charged defendant with the violation of law; and the authorities cited from the Court of Appeals (Oliver v. State, 16 Ala.App. 533, 79 So. 313 and Curlee v. State, 16 Ala.App. 62, 75 So. 268), and from this Court of Ferguson v. Starkey, 192 Ala. 471, 68 So. 348, are inapt.

The above noted Section 23 was carried into the Code of 1940 and appears as § 21, Title 8. The Code Committee saw fit to add a provision as to the publication of pamphlets which would include all laws relating to the subject as 'well as all rules and regulations, and concluded with the statement such pamphlets should be admitted in evidence without further proof. But we cannot interpret this provision as indicating an intention to work a change in the law of judicial notice as above discussed, and consider it as only a matter of public convenience.

We are in accord with the conclusion of the Court of Appeals and the writ will accordingly be denied.

Writ denied.

BOULDIN, FOSTER, and LIVINGSTON, JJ., concur.

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

GARDNER, Chief Justice.

Section 23, Gen.Acts 1935, p. 632, Code 1940, Tit. 8, § 21, expressly declares that the rules and regulations therein referred to, and mentioned in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, “shall have the force and effect of law”. That means very clearly the force and effect of a general law, a public statute.

“Where an act at the time of its passage is declared * * * to be a public statute, such declaration is equivalent to enacting that it be judicially noticed, for though local in its application, such a clause will establish it as a public statute and place it within the circle of the judicial knowledge of the court”. 20 Amer.Jur. 60.

The text is supported by the cited authority of Case v. Kelly, 133 U.S. 21, 10 S.Ct. 216, 33 L.Ed. 513. See also 23 C.J. 1897 upon the question of judicial notice and illustrations to be found.

The affidavit, therefore, correctly charged defendant with the violation of law; and the authorities cited from the Court of Appeals (Oliver v. State, 16 Ala.App. 533, 79 So. 313 and Curlee v. State, 16 Ala.App. 62, 75 So. 268), and from this Court of Ferguson v. Starkey, 192 Ala. 471, 68 So. 348, are inapt.

The above noted Section 23 was carried into the Code of 1940 and appears as § 21, Title 8. The Code Committee saw fit to add a provision as to the publication of pamphlets which would include all laws relating to the subject as 'well as all rules and regulations, and concluded with the statement such pamphlets should be admitted in evidence without further proof. But we cannot interpret this provision as indicating an intention to work a change in the law of judicial notice as above discussed, and consider it as only a matter of public convenience.

We are in accord with the conclusion of the Court of Appeals and the writ will accordingly be denied.

Writ denied.

BOULDIN, FOSTER, and LIVINGSTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 So. 2d 436, 242 Ala. 369, 1942 Ala. LEXIS 50, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-state-ala-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack