Abercrombie & Williams v. Vandiver

• Decision Date: 04 March 1904
• Citation: 37 So. 296,140 Ala. 228
• Parties: ABERCROMBIE & WILLIAMS v. VANDIVER.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

37 So. 296

140 Ala. 228

ABERCROMBIE & WILLIAMS v. VANDIVER.

Supreme Court of Alabama

March 4, 1904

Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; J. C. Richardson, Judge.

Action by Abercrombie & Williams, a partnership, against W. F. Vandiver. Judgment for plaintiffs for less than prayed, and they appeal. Affirmed.

J. M. Chilton, John P. Tillman, and Fred S. Ball, for appellant.

Graham & Steiner, for appellee.

McCLELLAN, C.J.

This cause was tried at the January term, 1901, of the circuit court. An order was then made by the court allowing 90 days for a bill of exceptions. This time was extended by successive written agreements of counsel to July 19, 1901. The bill of exceptions appearing in the record was signed on July 8, 1901. This was within the time of the last agreed extension, but it was after the commencement of the term of court succeeding that of the trial. On the authority of the case of Cooley v. United States Savings & Loan Association, 132 Ala. 590, 31 So. 521, which was reaffirmed and followed in the case of Birmingham Railway & Electric Company v. James (at this term) 36 So. 464, and has been again considered with reference to the case at bar, and is now again reaffirmed, the bill of exceptions, or rather the paper purporting to be a bill of exceptions, in this case must be disallowed as a bill of exceptions, and stricken from the record, because signed, though upon agreement, after the commencement of the next term of the court following the trial term, in violation of rule 30 of circuit and inferior courts practice (Code 1896, p. 1200).

All the assignments of error are based upon the supposed bill of exceptions. That being eliminated from the record, no ruling of the circuit court is presented for review, and the judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed.