State ex rel. Alabama Insane Hospital v. M. & O. R. R.
State, for use Alabama Insane Hospital v. M. & O. R. R. Co.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
ANDERSON, C. J.
The legal questions involved in this appeal haye been fully discussed and considered by this court, and decided adversely to the contention of the appellant, and we do not feel disposed to depart from said' holding. — J ordan v. McClure Lumber Co., 170 Ala. 289 , 54 South. 415 ; Turner v. Davis, 186 Ala. 77 , 64 South. 958 ; Brannan v. Henry, 175 Ala. 454 , 57 South. 967 .
In the last case supra the constitutionality of the act of 1911 (page 192) was considered, and the same was declared to be constitutional, and we repeat that the said act is not repugnant to the federal or state Constitution. The act is unlike the one condemned in the-case of Bailey v. Alabama, 219 U. S. 219 , 31 Sup. Ct. 145, 55 L. Ed. 191 .
The decree of the chancery court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
McClellan, Mayfield, and Somerville, JJ , concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.