Williams v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Williams v. State

112 So. 193, 215 Ala. 586, 1927 Ala. LEXIS 608

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedMarch 24, 1927

Docket2 Div. 907.

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 112 So. 193 (Williams 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

Williams v. State, 112 So. 193, 215 Ala. 586, 1927 Ala. LEXIS 608 (Ala. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWN, X

Section 6095 of the Code 1923, which provides that “the parties in *587 any suit or proceeding whatever, in any circuit, county or probate court, may make an agreed case containing the points of law at issue between them, and file the .same in such court; and the said agreed ease, with the decision thereon, may be certified to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court by the clerk of such court, without certifying any fuller record in the case; and upon such agreed case being so certified and filed in the Court of, Appeals or Supreme Court, the appellant or plaintiff -in error may assign errors, and the case shall then he proceeded with in the same manner as it might have been had a full record been certified to said Court of Appeals or Supreme Court,” does not authorize the review of the trial court on the finding of facts based on conflicting evidence or the admission or exclusion of evidence relating to a disputed issue of fact, but is limited in its scope to an “agreed” case presenting questions of law as in case of a special verdict or demurrer to the evidence. 1 R. C. L. 777, § 2.

Section 6110 of the Code which authorizes the parties to “agree in writing upon an abstract of the record in the ease” does not do away with the necessity of making the evidence offered on the trial of a case at law a part of the record by bill of exceptions. The purpose and scope of this statute is to authorize the parties by written agreement to substitute an abstract of the record for a complete transcript, thereby curtailing the costs of the appeal.

The question which the appellant seeks to present is the validity and regularity of the assessment of his property for taxes, a mixed question of law and fact, and whether or not the taxes were paid prior to the initiation of the proceedings for the sale of the property', a disputed question of fact, and in the absence of a bill of exceptions properly presenting these questions, this court is without authority to disturb the judgment from which the appeal is prosecuted. Chapman v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 213 Ala. 255, 104 So. 517; White v. Roe, 151 Ala. 287, 44 So. 211.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J„ and SOMERVILLE and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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

BROWN, X

Section 6095 of the Code 1923, which provides that “the parties in *587 any suit or proceeding whatever, in any circuit, county or probate court, may make an agreed case containing the points of law at issue between them, and file the .same in such court; and the said agreed ease, with the decision thereon, may be certified to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court by the clerk of such court, without certifying any fuller record in the case; and upon such agreed case being so certified and filed in the Court of, Appeals or Supreme Court, the appellant or plaintiff -in error may assign errors, and the case shall then he proceeded with in the same manner as it might have been had a full record been certified to said Court of Appeals or Supreme Court,” does not authorize the review of the trial court on the finding of facts based on conflicting evidence or the admission or exclusion of evidence relating to a disputed issue of fact, but is limited in its scope to an “agreed” case presenting questions of law as in case of a special verdict or demurrer to the evidence. 1 R. C. L. 777, § 2.

Section 6110 of the Code which authorizes the parties to “agree in writing upon an abstract of the record in the ease” does not do away with the necessity of making the evidence offered on the trial of a case at law a part of the record by bill of exceptions. The purpose and scope of this statute is to authorize the parties by written agreement to substitute an abstract of the record for a complete transcript, thereby curtailing the costs of the appeal.

The question which the appellant seeks to present is the validity and regularity of the assessment of his property for taxes, a mixed question of law and fact, and whether or not the taxes were paid prior to the initiation of the proceedings for the sale of the property', a disputed question of fact, and in the absence of a bill of exceptions properly presenting these questions, this court is without authority to disturb the judgment from which the appeal is prosecuted. Chapman v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 213 Ala. 255, 104 So. 517; White v. Roe, 151 Ala. 287, 44 So. 211.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J„ and SOMERVILLE and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 So. 193, 215 Ala. 586, 1927 Ala. LEXIS 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-state-ala-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack