TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Thomas v. Thomas

THOMAS Et Al v. THOMAS Et Al.

Thomas v. Thomas, 107 So. 810 (Ala. 1926)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Alabama · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 18, 1926
Docket
No. 8 Div. 838.
Judges
Miller, Anderson, Sayre, Gardner
Citations
107 So. 810214 Ala. 2931926 Ala. LEXIS 222

Opinion of the Court — Miller

MILLER, J.

This is a hill in equity filed by S. W. Thomas and others against W. S. Thomas and others. The bill was amended. Jennie Derrick and another respondent demurred to the bill as amended. The court, by decree rendered on August 5, 1925, sustained the demurrers to the bill as amended. The complainants, on August 19, 1925, filed motion to set aside that decree and grant them a rehearing. The court by decree overruled this motion for a rehearing on December 3, 1925. The complainants appealed from the decree rendered December 3, 1925, by giving security for the cost of the appeal, .which was approved December 31, 1925.

An appeal lies to this court from a (lecree rendered by the circuit court in equity sustaining- a demurrer to the bill of complaint, if taken within 30 days from the rendition thereof. Section 6079, Code 1923. No appeal from the decree rendered August 5, 1925, sustaining demurrers to the hill of complaint was taken by the complainants at any time. The appeal was taken on December 31, 1925, from the “decree rendered on ■the--day of December, 1925.” There was only one decree rendered in December, 1925. That was on December 3,1925, which overruled the motion of complainants to set aside the decree sustaining demurrers to the bill of complaint as amended. No appeal is authorized by statute to this court from a decree overruling a motion to set aside a decree sustaining demurrers to a bill of complaint as originally filed or as amended. Sections 6079, 6078, 6081, 6082, Code of 1923.

This court is without jurisdiction to entertain this appeal, because no statute authorizes it, and without authority by statute this court cannot take jurisdiction of it. So this appeal will be and is dismissed by this court ex mero motu. Clark v. Spencer, 80 Ala. 345 ; Worthington v. Morris, 102 So. 620 , 212 Ala. 334 ; Snider v. Funderburk, 96 So. 928 , 209 Ala. 663 ; Bickley v. Hays, 62 So. 767 , 183 Ala. 506 .

The appeal is dismissed.

ANDERSON, O. J., and SAYRE and GARDNER, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1950: 11953: 11966: 119502026peak 1950 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Vacalis v. Lowry184 So. 2d 345 (Ala. 1966)
  2. Ramsey v. Wilkins46 So. 2d 407 (Ala. 1950)
  3. Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International, Local No. 216 v. Brown & Root, Inc.63 So. 2d 372 (Ala. 1953)

Most recent

  1. Vacalis v. Lowry184 So. 2d 345 (Ala. 1966)
  2. Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International, Local No. 216 v. Brown & Root, Inc.63 So. 2d 372 (Ala. 1953)
  3. Ramsey v. Wilkins46 So. 2d 407 (Ala. 1950)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Worthington v. Morris, 102 So. 620 (Ala. 1925) 11
Snider v. Funderburk, 96 So. 928 (Ala. 1923) 9
Bickley v. Hays, 62 So. 767 (Ala. 1913) 7
Clark v. Spencer, 80 Ala. 345 (1885) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list