Preddy v. Herren Sales Co.

Decision Date10 June 1926
Docket Number7 Div. 655
CitationPreddy v. Herren Sales Co., 215 Ala. 216, 110 So. 131 (Ala. 1926)
PartiesPREDDY v. HERREN SALES CO.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Rehearing Denied Nov. 11, 1926

Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County; R.B. Carr, Judge.

Bill in equity by the Herren Sales Company against F.C. Preddy and others. From the decree respondent Preddy appeals. Appeal dismissed.

Chas F. Douglas, of Anniston, for appellant.

Agee &amp Bibb and H.H. Evans, all of Anniston, for appellee.

ANDERSON C.J.

A final decree was rendered in this cause November 18, 1925. Thereafter the appellant moved the court to set aside said decree, and, after being passed from time to time, the motion was overruled February 16, 1926, and it is from this last decree overruling the motion that this appeal is prosecuted. This decree will not support an appeal, which must be dismissed upon the authority of Wood v. Finney, 207 Ala. 160, 92 So. 264.

Appeal dismissed.

SOMERVILLE THOMAS, and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.

On Rehearing.

ANDERSON C.J.

The appellant upon application for rehearing seeks for the first time a mandamus to review this nonappealable decree. True, this court has on former occasions awarded mandamus to review certain nonappealable orders or decrees, but the writ was asked for in the alternative upon the submission of the cause. Whether or not mandamus would be appropriate to review the order in question we need not decide, for the reason that the application for same comes too late. Cornelius v. Moore, 208 Ala. 237, 94 So. 57.

SOMERVILLE THOMAS, and BO...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
9 cases
  • Robinson Co. v. Beck, 5 Div. 589
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • October 7, 1954
    ...submitted upon the submission of the cause and it cannot be considered. Cornelius v. Moore, 208 Ala. 237, 94 So. 57; Preddy v. Herren Sales Co., 215 Ala. 216, 110 So. 131; Ex parte State ex rel. Denson, 248 Ala. 161, 26 So.2d 563. Neither has there been 'spread a motion on the docket, befor......
  • Nelson v. Darling Shop of Birmingham, Inc.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 28, 1963
    ...Robinson Co., Inc. v. Beck, 261 Ala. 531, 74 So.2d 915, Ex parte State ex rel. Denson, 248 Ala. 161, 26 So.2d 563; Preddy v. Herren Sales Co., 215 Ala. 216, 110 So. 131. The application is therefore Motion for Oral Argument and Consent to File Supplemental Brief Counsel for appellant have f......
  • Ex parte State ex rel. Denson
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • April 25, 1946
    ... ... considered. Cornelius v. Moore, 208 Ala. 237, 94 So ... 57; Preddy v. Herren Sales Co., 215 Ala. 216, 110 ... So. 131. Judge Windham, therefore, well exercised his ... ...
  • Johnson v. Johnson
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • January 13, 1927
    ...Gresham, 82 Ala. 359, 2 So. 486; Cox v. Brown, 198 Ala. 638, 73 So. 964; Hale v. Kinnaird, 200 Ala. 596, 76 So. 954; Preddy v. Herren Sales Co. (Ala.Sup.) 110 So. 131. In Golden v. Golden, 102 Ala. 353, 14 So. 638 by council for appellant), an original bill in the nature of a bill of review......
  • Get Started for Free