Rollins v. Deason
Decision Date | 22 September 1955 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 851 |
Citation | 263 Ala. 358,82 So.2d 546 |
Parties | Loren W. ROLLINS v. J. H. DEASON. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Selman & Beaird, Jasper, for appellant.
Arthur Fite, Sr., Chas. Tweedy, Jr., and Hoyt Elliott, Jasper, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of Walker County, in Equity, denying the petition of appellant, Loren W. Rollins, to be allowed to intervene in an injunction proceeding pending in that court wherein J. H. Deason is complainant and the members of the County Board of Supervisors, charged with canvassing the County election returns, are respondents. There seems to be no question that the decree denying the right of intervention is appealable. Grace v. Birmingham Trust & Savings Co., 257 Ala. 507, 517, 59 So.2d 595; Franklin v. Dorsey-Jackson Chevrolet Co., 246 Ala. 245, 248, 20 So.2d 220, 157 A.L.R. 154; Weller & Sons v. Rensford, 164 Ala. 312, 315, 51 So. 344; Ex parte Gray, 157 Ala. 358, 364, 47 So. 286, 131 Am.St.Rep. 62.
Deason alleges in his complaint, filed on November 8, 1954, that he is the duly appointed and qualified holder of the office of Member of the County Board of Revenue for District No. One; that his term of office expires in January, 1956; that in the general election held on November 2, 1954, there were seventy-six write-in votes for one Arthur Smith for said office even though no lawful election was being held to fill said office in said election; that the respondents, as the official canvassers of the vote, are about to meet and declare the said Arthur Smith elected to said office. A temporary injunction was issued, as prayed for, on the same day the bill was filed, restraining the canvassing board from so acting. On December 6, 1954, Rollins, as a voter and taxpayer, filed a petition to be allowed to intervene in the proceedings so that he could resist Deason's effort to permanently restrain the canvassing board. He alleged in his petition that, in addition to being a taxpayer, he voted for Smith in the election and thus has an interest in seeing that Smith's election is upheld. Deason's motion to dismiss the petition was granted and Rollins prosecutes this appeal from the decree of dismissal. Submission was had on March 22, 1955.
We are not here concerned with the merits of Deason's bill of complaint. The only question presented is whether Rollins has made out a case for intervention, assuming, without deciding, that Deason's bill has equity.
Code 1940, Tit. 7, § 247, provides as follows:
Equity Rule 37, Code 1940, Tit. 7, Appendix, is as follows:
'The petition shall set forth the ground for intervention and the facts supporting them; and the court shall prescribe in the order allowing the filing, the time allowed other parties to demur to or to answer the petition if so advised, and testimony may be taken thereon, if the averments require proof.'
From 39 Am.Jur., Part...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ingalls Iron Works Co. v. Ingalls Foundation
...and both the rule and the statute provide for intervention by one who has an interest in the matter in litigation. Rollins v. Deason, 263 Ala. 358, 82 So.2d 546. Stockholders may intervene in actions against the corporation only when the corporation refuses to defend or fails to defend in g......
-
Crawford v. Espalla, 1 Div. 687
...243 Ala. 118, 8 So.2d 926, and the relation of the statute to Equity Rule 37, Code 1940, Title 7 Appendix was noted in Rollins v. Deason, 263 Ala. 358, 82 So.2d 546. As we have already undertaken to show, under the averments of appellants' bill in the instant case, Espalla, the intervenor a......
-
City of Birmingham v. Hallmark, 6 Div. 22
...Co., 246 Ala. 245, 20 So.2d 220, 157 A.L.R. 154; Grace v. Birmingham Trust & Savings Co., 257 Ala. 507, 59 So.2d 595; Rollins v. Deason, 263 Ala. 358, 82 So.2d 546. See ex parte Gray, 157 Ala. 358, 47 So. 286. Cf. Ramsey v. Wilkins, 253 Ala. 614, 43 So.2d In view of the recent decisions of ......
-
City of Mobile v. Gulf Development Co.
...petition had been dismissed. See: Franklin v. Dorsey-Jackson Chevrolet Co., 246 Ala. 245, 20 So.2d 220, 157 A.L.R. 154; Rollins v. Deason, 263 Ala. 358, 82 So.2d 546; City of Birmingham v. Hallmark, 266 Ala. 582, 98 So.2d In Cortner v. Galyon, 223 Ala. 405, 137 So. 30, on appeal from a decr......