Skidmore v. H.C. Whitmer Co., 8 Div. 222.
Citation | 130 So. 194,221 Ala. 561 |
Decision Date | 09 October 1930 |
Docket Number | 8 Div. 222. |
Parties | SKIDMORE ET AL. v. H. C. WHITMER CO. |
Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Marshall County; A. E. Hawkins, Judge.
Action by the H. C. Whitmer Company against J. E. Skidmore, G. L. Gober, and J. S. Garrison. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.
Transferred from Court of Appeals.
Affirmed.
T. Harvey Wright, of Guntersville, and Wright & McAfee, of Decatur, for appellants.
D. Isabell, of Guntersville, for appellee.
The ruling of the court upon the demurrers to the complaint and pleas cannot be reviewed by this court. There is no formal judgment as to same, and the action of the trial court is indicated only by the bench notes, and which fall short of such a judgment or adjudication as required by law. McDonald v. Alabama Midland Railway Co., 123 Ala. 227, 26 So. 165.
There is no complaint as to the ruling upon the evidence, and the only other errors insisted upon pertain to the conclusion of the court in rendering a judgment for the plaintiff, the case having been tried without a jury. The bill of exceptions does not purport to contain all the evidence; therefore the judgment of the trial court cannot be disturbed.
The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hiller v. Goodwin
...Ala. 222, 5 So.2d 472; Wilbanks v. Mitchell, 239 Ala. 167, 194 So. 513; Cooper v. Owen, 230 Ala. 316, 161 So. 98; Skidmore v. H. C. Whitmer Co., 221 Ala. 561, 130 So. 194; McDonald v. Alabama-Midland R. Co., 123 Ala. 227, 26 So. We predicate our conclusion as to assignment No. 12 on that st......
-
Coleman v. State, 4 Div. 234
...and there are no formal judgments in these aspects appearing. Beatty v. State, 36 Ala.App. 699, 63 So.2d 287; Skidmore v. H. C. Whitmer Co., 221 Ala. 561, 130 So. 194; Aplin v. Dean, 231 Ala. 320, 164 So. 737; Jones v. Daniel, 34 Ala.App. 490, 41 So.2d 627; Campbell v. State, 29 Ala.App. 34......
-
Dawson v. Campbell
...Ala. 222, 5 So.2d 472; Wilbanks v. Mitchell, 239 Ala. 167, 194 So. 513; Cooper v. Owen, 230 Ala. 316, 161 So. 98; Skidmore v. H. C. Whitmer Co., 221 Ala. 561, 130 So. 194; Alabama National Bank v. Hunt, 125 Ala. 512, 28 So. 488; McDonald v. Alabama Midland Railway Co., 123 Ala. 227, 26 So. ......
-
Cooper v. Mann
...Ala. 222, 5 So.2d 472; Wilbanks v. Mitchell, 239 Ala. 167, 194 So. 513; Cooper v. Owen, 230 Ala. 316, 161 So. 98; Skidmore v. H. C. Whitmer Co., 221 Ala. 561, 130 So. 194; Alabama National Bank v. Hunt, 125 Ala. 512, 28 So. 488; McDonald v. Alabama Midland Railway Co., 123 Ala. 227, 26 So. ......