Snider v. Funderburk

12 Citing cases

  1. COX v. CITY OF BIRMINGHAM

    21 Ala. App. 341 (Ala. Crim. App. 1926)   Cited 10 times

    The appeal was not taken within 30 days from the date of original judgment, and will not be considered. Lewis v. Martin, 210 Ala. 401, 98 So. 635; Woodward Iron Co. v. Bradford, 206 Ala. 447, 90 So. 803; Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928; Minge v. Smith, 206 Ala. 330, 89 So. 473; Code 1923, § 2211. SAMFORD, J.

  2. Gray v. State

    185 So. 2d 125 (Ala. 1966)   Cited 18 times

    This dismissal may be on motion. Wetzel v. Dixon, 227 Ala. 46, 148 So. 857; Williams v. Knight, 233 Ala. 42, 169 So. 871; or ex mero motu, because this court is without jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Irwin v. Weil, 228 Ala. 489, 153 So. 746; Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928; Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 So. 576. That brings us to the question of when an appeal is "taken."

  3. Key v. Dozier

    64 So. 2d 69 (Ala. 1953)   Cited 1 times

    Appeal from decree on demurrer to bill must be taken within 30 days. If taken after statutory period the appeal must be dismissed, the court being without jurisdiction. Code 1940, Tit. 7, § 755; Irwin v. Weil, 228 Ala. 489, 153 So. 746; Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928; Colbert County v. Tenn. Valley Bank, 225 Ala. 632, 144 So. 803. PER CURIAM.

  4. Irwin v. Weil

    153 So. 746 (Ala. 1934)   Cited 14 times

    Section 6127, Code; Colbert County v. Tennessee Valley Bank, 225 Ala. 632, 144 So. 803; Hildebrand v. First Nat. Bank of Fairfield, 221 Ala. 216, 128 So. 219; Collins Paving Co. v. Holseapple, 221 Ala. 308, 128 So. 599; Thompson v. State ex rel. Reeves, 216 Ala. 348, 113 So. 296; City of Troy v. Murphree, 214 Ala. 118, 107 So. 83. The appeal, taken after the time prescribed by statute, will be dismissed ex mero motu, because this court is without jurisdiction to consider same. Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928; Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 So. 576; Bickley v. Hays, 183 Ala. 506, 62 So. 767. Appeal dismissed.

  5. Hildebrand v. First Nat. Bank of Fairfield

    128 So. 219 (Ala. 1930)   Cited 14 times

    Section 6101, Code, provides the manner of taking an appeal, and section 6127, the time in which it must be done, and, unless taken in such time and manner as there provided, it is not taken at all. Peters v. Schuessler, 208 Ala. 627, 95 So. 26, 27; Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928; Burgin v. Sugg, 210 Ala. 142, 97 So. 216. The case of Peters v. Schuessler, supra, is of a similar nature to this one.

  6. Bedwell v. Dean

    128 So. 389 (Ala. 1930)   Cited 13 times

    Where an appeal is taken by giving and having approved a supersedeas bond, the appeal is not taken until the appellant has had the bond approved. Code 1923, § 6101; Crowder v. Morgan, 72 Ala. 535; Kimbrell v. Rogers, 90 Ala. 339, 7 So. 241; Liverpool, etc., Co. v. Lowe, 208 Ala. 12, 93 So. 765; Holmes v. Holmes, 210 Ala. 227, 97 So. 628; Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928. FOSTER, J.

  7. Stough v. New York Life Ins. Co.

    115 So. 155 (Ala. 1928)   Cited 2 times

    The question is a jurisdictional one, as settled by numerous decisions of this court. Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 So. 576; Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928. Appeal dismissed.

  8. Thomas v. Thomas

    107 So. 810 (Ala. 1926)   Cited 5 times

    There was only one decree rendered in December, 1925. That was on December 3, 1925, which overruled the motion of complainants to set aside the decree sustaining demurrers to the bill of complaint as amended. No appeal is authorized by statute to this court from a decree overruling a motion to set aside a decree sustaining demurrers to a bill of complaint as originally filed or as amended. Sections 6079, 6078, 6081, 6082, Code of 1923. This court is without jurisdiction to entertain this appeal, because no statute authorizes it, and without authority by statute this court cannot take jurisdiction of it. So this appeal will be and is dismissed by this court ex mero motu. Clark v. Spencer, 80 Ala. 345; Worthington v. Morris, 102 So. 620, 212 Ala. 334; Snider v. Funderburk, 96 So. 928, 209 Ala. 663; Bickley v. Hays, 62 So. 767, 183 Ala. 506. The appeal is dismissed.

  9. City of Troy v. Murphree

    107 So. 83 (Ala. 1926)   Cited 15 times

    It was taken August 3, 1925, and the decree was rendered June 12, 1925, which was more than 30 days after the decree was rendered. The appeal must be, and is hereby, dismissed ex mero motu by this court, because this court is without jurisdiction to consider it. Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928; Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 So. 576; Bickley v. Hays, 183 Ala. 506, 62 So. 767. The appeal is dismissed.

  10. Kyser v. American Surety Co.

    213 Ala. 614 (Ala. 1925)   Cited 32 times

    The court is without jurisdiction to entertain the assignments of error directed to the decree of November 1, 1924, because no appeal was taken therefrom. Code 1923, § 6079; Stoudenmire v. De Bardelaben, 85 Ala. 85, 4 So. 723; Bickley v. Hays, 183 Ala. 506, 62 So. 767; Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 So. 576; Snider v. Funderburk, 209 Ala. 663, 96 So. 928. The general demurrer constituted a general appearance and a waiver of the question of venue. Code 1923, §§ 6524, 6553; 2 R. C. L. 327; 4 C. J. 1337; White v. White, 206 Ala. 232, 89 So. 579; Branch Bank v. Rutledge, 13 Ala. 196; Woolf v. McGaugh, 175 Ala. 299, 57 So. 754.