Tennessee River Nav. Co. v. Grantland

Citation199 Ala. 674,75 So. 283
Decision Date19 April 1917
Docket Number8 Div. 12
PartiesTENNESSEE RIVER NAV. CO. v. GRANTLAND.
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

Appeal from Law and Equity Court, Morgan County; Thomas W. Wert, Judge.

Action between the Tennessee River Navigation Company and W.G. Grantland. From a judgment the Navigation Company appeals. Transferred from the Court of Appeals under Acts 1911, p. 450, § 6. Dismissed.

Wert & Lynne, of Decatur, for appellant.

Tennis Tidwell, of Albany, and Sample & Kilpatrick, of Cullman, for appellee.

ANDERSON, C.J.

This appeal was not only taken more than six months after the rendition of the judgment, but more than six months after the approval of the act of September 22, 1915, p. 711, which said act provides that appeals must be taken within six months. True, the judgment was rendered before the enactment of the statute above cited, but this statute relates to a remedy, and does not affect a vested right, and applies to all appeals so as to require that they be taken within six months thereafter notwithstanding the judgment was rendered prior to the enactment of the statute. Poull & Co. v. Foy-Hays Co., 159 Ala. 453, 48 So. 785, and cases there cited; Jefferson County Savings Bank v. Barbour, 191 Ala. 238, 68 So. 43. The last enactment was not applied in the Poull Case, supra, for the reason that section 10 of the Code saved it from the operation of other sections of the Code, but section 10 does not apply to acts of the Legislature subsequent to the Code, and said case is an authority that the act in question applies to appeals from existing judgments. We made a ruling similar to this upon a motion in the case of McCrary v. Donald, but as to which no opinion was prepared. Motion Docket 54, p. 265.

The appeal is dismissed.

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

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Crawford v. Mills
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 29, 1918
    ...... 381; Coker v. Fountain, 75 So. 471; T.R. N. Co. v. Grantland, 75 So. 283; Poull & Co. v. Foy-Hays. Co., 159 Ala. 453, 48 So. 785; ......
  • State, Dept. of Social Services v. Higgs, 17607
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Utah
    • November 26, 1982
    ...at 171-72, 104 P. at 119-20. See also United States v. National City Lines, 80 F.Supp. 734 (S.D.Cal.1948); Tennessee River Nav. Co. v. Grantland, 199 Ala. 674, 75 So. 283 (1917); Boyda Dairy Co. v. Continental Casualty Co., 299 Ill.App. 469, 20 N.E.2d 339 Section 67-19-25 of the Personnel M......
  • Cronheim v. Loveman, 6 Div. 164.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 9, 1932
    ......Coker v. Fountain, 200 Ala. 95,. 75 So. 471; Tennessee River Nav. Co. v. Grantland,. 199 Ala. 674, 75 So. 283; Medical College ......
  • Coker v. Fountain
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • April 19, 1917
    ...... recently had this same question presented in Tenn. River. Navigation Co. v. Grantland, 75 So. 283 (present term),. which is ......
  • 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