Stallworth v. Brown
Decision Date | 21 April 1908 |
Citation | 155 Ala. 217,46 So. 467 |
Parties | STALLWORTH ET AL. v. BROWN ET AL. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Mobile County; Samuel B. Browne, Judge.
Suit to quiet title between Garland G. Stallworth and others and O H. Brown and others. Issues having been certified by the chancery court to the circuit court for jury trial Stallworth and others appeal from the verdict and from an order of the circuit court certifying the verdict to the chancery court, and appellees move to dismiss the appeal. Appeal dismissed.
Gregory L. & H. T. Smith, for appellants.
McIntosh & Ritch, for appellees.
This case originated in the chancery court of Mobile county, on a bill filed under sections 809-813 of the Civil Code of 1896 to quiet the title to certain lands described in the bill of complaint. Section 812, among other things, provides that "upon the application of either party, a trial by jury shall be directed to determine the issues, or any specified issue, of fact presented by the pleadings; and the court is bound by the result, but may, for sufficient reasons, order a new trial thereof." Under this statute, on application made in the chancery court, by the complainants, for a trial by jury, that court certified certain issues of fact to the circuit court, to be determined in that court by a jury. Civ Code 1896, § 824. It appears from the record that the issues certified were tried in the circuit court by a jury, and that the verdict of the jury responded to each of the issues. On the return of the verdict it was entered in the minutes of the court, and following it the circuit court made this order: "It is therefore ordered and adjudged by the court that the foregoing verdict of the jury upon said issues be certified to the chancery court for the Thirteenth district of the Southwestern chancery division of the state of Alabama." From the verdict and this order (the certificate of the clerk shows) this appeal is prosecuted, and the record fails to disclose that any other order was made by the circuit court in respect to the verdict of the jury or to the issues certified to it by the chancery court. The appellees have appeared and entered a motion to dismiss the appeal.
In resistance of this motion the appellants argue that as the chancery court shall, upon the finding of the jury, finally adjudge and decree upon the rights of the parties, the order of the circuit court...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Alabama, T. & N. Ry. Co. v. Aliceville Lumber Co.
... ... Tobias, supra; Mathews v. Forniss, 91 Ala. 157, 8 ... So. 661; Norwood v. L. & N.R.R. Co., 149 Ala. 151, ... 159, 42 So. 683; Stallworth v. Brown, 155 Ala. 217, ... 46 So. 467; Ex parte Colvert, supra; 1 Pom.Eq.Jur. § 32; ... Adam's Eq. 376; 1 Story, Eq.Jur. 72 ... In ... ...
-
Federal Automobile Ins. Ass'n v. Abrams
...Ala. 567, 574, 64 So. 960; Beall v. Lehman, Durr Co., 128 Ala. 165, 29 So. 12; Tatum v. Yahn, 130 Ala. 575, 29 So. 201; Stallworth v. Brown, 155 Ala. 217, 46 So. 467; De Graffenried v. Breitling, 192 Ala. 254, 68 265. It was not necessary for complainant to aver that neither a motion for ne......
-
Ex parte State ex rel. Simpson, 8 Div. 473
...348, 3 So. 670; Mathews v. Forniss, 91 Ala. 157, 8 So. 661; Norwood v. Louisville & N. RR. Co., 149 Ala. 151, 42 So. 683; Stallworth v. Brown, 155 Ala. 217, 46 So. 467; Ex parte Colvert, 188 Ala. 650, 65 So. Since Title 13, § 351, Code of Alabama, 1940, and Section 8 of Act No. 1878, Acts o......