From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Preddy v. Herren Sales Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama
Nov 11, 1926
110 So. 131 (Ala. 1926)

Opinion

7 Div. 655.

June 10, 1926. Rehearing Denied November 11, 1926.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County; R. B. Carr, Judge.

Chas. F. Douglas, of Anniston, for appellant.

The decree appealed from is a final decree, which will support an appeal. Code 1923, §§ 6078, 7857.

Agee Bibb and H. H. Evans, all of Anniston, for appellee.

The order in this case is not appealable. Coker v. Fountain, 200 Ala. 95, 75 So. 471; Wood v. Finney, 207 Ala. 160, 92 So. 264; Code 1923, §§ 6078-6094.


A final decree was rendered in this cause November 18, 1925. Thereafter the appellant moved the court to set aside said decree, and, after being passed from time to time, the motion was overruled February 16, 1926, and it is from this last decree overruling the motion that this appeal is prosecuted. This decree will not support an appeal, which must be dismissed upon the authority of Wood v. Finney, 207 Ala. 160, 92 So. 264.

Appeal dismissed.

SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.

On Rehearing.


The appellant upon application for rehearing seeks for the first time a mandamus to review this nonappealable decree. True, this court has on former occasions awarded mandamus to review certain nonappealable orders or decrees, but the writ was asked for in the alternative upon the submission of the cause. Whether or not mandamus would be appropriate to review the order in question we need not decide, for the reason that the application for same comes too late. Cornelius v. Moore, 208 Ala. 237, 94 So. 57.

SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Preddy v. Herren Sales Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama
Nov 11, 1926
110 So. 131 (Ala. 1926)
Case details for

Preddy v. Herren Sales Co.

Case Details

Full title:PREDDY v. HERREN SALES CO

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Nov 11, 1926

Citations

110 So. 131 (Ala. 1926)
215 Ala. 216

Citing Cases

Taylor v. Major Finance Co., Inc.

Schofield v. Franklin, 276 Ala. 374, 162 So.2d 469 (1964). A petition for mandamus to review a nonappealable…

Ford v. Ford

No appeal lies from a decree on such application. Ex parte Upchurch, 215 Ala. 610, 112 So. 202; Johnson v.…