Sellers v. Dickert, 682

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
Writing for the CourtANDERSON, C.J.
Citation69 So. 604,194 Ala. 661
PartiesSELLERS et al. v. DICKERT et al.
Docket Number682
Decision Date18 June 1915

69 So. 604

194 Ala. 661

SELLERS et al.
v.
DICKERT et al.

No. 682

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 18, 1915


Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County; Hugh D. Merrill, Judge.

Action between E.M. Sellers and another and Oma Dickert and another. From a judgment for the latter, the former appeal. Affirmed.

Rutherford Lapsley, of Anniston, for appellants.

Willett & Willett, of Anniston, for appellees.

ANDERSON, C.J.

The judgment from which this appeal is taken was rendered May 24, 1914, and the judgment upon the demurrer to amended count 2, which is the subject of the first assignment of error, was rendered May 11, 1912. It seems that, after the ruling complained of, there was a judgment against these appellants and an appeal to this court, which is reported in 64 So. 40, wherein the judgment was reversed, and the judgment upon which this appeal is based was rendered subsequent to said reversal. The ruling now complained of was made prior to the first appeal, and was revisable upon said first appeal. It appears from the record of said former appeal that the ruling of the trial court upon the demurrer to amended count 2 was not urged or insisted upon. See 64 So. 42, in the former report of the case.

"The general rule is that on a second or subsequent appeal or writ of error the court will not consider matters assigned as error which arose prior to the first appeal or writ of error, and which might have been raised thereon, but were not, or matters appearing in the original record, which might have been corrected on the first hearing, but were not urged." Ala. City G. & A.R.R. Co. v. Bates, 155 Ala. 347, 46 So. 776, and authorities there cited.

We therefore decline to consider the assignment of error relating to the ruling upon the demurrer to amended count 2 of the complaint.

The bill of exceptions was presented to the trial judge August 18, 1914, and was signed by him on the 18th of November, 1914, more than 90 days after the presentation. Section 3019 of the Code of 1907 requires that the bill must be signed by the judge within 90 days after the presentation. The appellees' motion to strike the bill of exceptions is accordingly sustained, and the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

McCLELLAN, SAYRE, and GARDNER, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 practice notes
  • Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Smith
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 17 Julio 1998
    ...v. Goldhammer, 608 So.2d 394 (Ala.1992) (holding that an unappealed summary judgment becomes the law of the case); Sellers v. Dickert, 194 Ala. 661, 69 So. 604 (1915) (holding, in a second appeal, that a matter that had occurred before the first appeal, but that was not raised in the first ......
  • Batson v. State, 6 Div. 798
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 26 Mayo 1927
    ...procuring its dismissal by this court was a waiver of matters duly presented by that ruling and appeal therefrom. Sellers v. Dickert, 194 Ala. 661, 69 So. 604; Ala., etc., Co. v. Bates, 155 Ala. 347, 46 So. 776; McGeever v. Terre Haute Co., 201 Ala. 290, 78 So. 66. This is the general rule ......
  • Scrushy v. Tucker, 1081424.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 15 Abril 2011
    ...the law of the case.” Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Smith, 719 So.2d 797, 801 (Ala.1998) (summarizing the holding in Sellers v. Dickert, 194 Ala. 661, 69 So. 604 (1915)).3 The doctrine in this form was applied in Bankruptcy Authorities, Inc. v. State, 620 So.2d 626 (Ala.1993), which was the s......
  • Scrushy v. Tucker, 1081424
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 4 Febrero 2011
    ...the case." Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Smith, 719 So. 2d 797, 801 (Ala. 1998) (summarizing the holding in Sellers v.Page 31 Dickert, 194 Ala. 661, 69 So. 604 (1915)).3 The doctrine in this form was applied in Bankruptcy Authorities, Inc. v. State, 620 So. 2d 626 (Ala. 1993), which was ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
20 cases
  • Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Smith
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 17 Julio 1998
    ...v. Goldhammer, 608 So.2d 394 (Ala.1992) (holding that an unappealed summary judgment becomes the law of the case); Sellers v. Dickert, 194 Ala. 661, 69 So. 604 (1915) (holding, in a second appeal, that a matter that had occurred before the first appeal, but that was not raised in the first ......
  • Batson v. State, 6 Div. 798
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 26 Mayo 1927
    ...procuring its dismissal by this court was a waiver of matters duly presented by that ruling and appeal therefrom. Sellers v. Dickert, 194 Ala. 661, 69 So. 604; Ala., etc., Co. v. Bates, 155 Ala. 347, 46 So. 776; McGeever v. Terre Haute Co., 201 Ala. 290, 78 So. 66. This is the general rule ......
  • Scrushy v. Tucker, 1081424.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 15 Abril 2011
    ...the law of the case.” Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Smith, 719 So.2d 797, 801 (Ala.1998) (summarizing the holding in Sellers v. Dickert, 194 Ala. 661, 69 So. 604 (1915)).3 The doctrine in this form was applied in Bankruptcy Authorities, Inc. v. State, 620 So.2d 626 (Ala.1993), which was the s......
  • Scrushy v. Tucker, 1081424
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 4 Febrero 2011
    ...the case." Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Smith, 719 So. 2d 797, 801 (Ala. 1998) (summarizing the holding in Sellers v.Page 31 Dickert, 194 Ala. 661, 69 So. 604 (1915)).3 The doctrine in this form was applied in Bankruptcy Authorities, Inc. v. State, 620 So. 2d 626 (Ala. 1993), which was ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT