Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924

Ex Parte Trimble

Supreme Court of Alabama · Decided June 12, 1924 · No. 6 Div. 178. · THOMAS, J.

101 So. 524; 211 Ala. 654; 1924 Ala. LEXIS 341 (Southern Reporter)

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Casteel v. City of Decatur (Ala. 1926)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, J. Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.

On Rehearing.The trial was de novo in the circuit court. Wright v City of Bessemer, 209 Ala. 374, 96 So. 316. The certiorari is ruled by Thomas v. City of Mobile, 203 Ala. 96, 82 So. 110. The latter authority from this court differentiates, or is at variance with, the construction given the statute and general ordinances in question (Code 1907, § 1217) in Goldberger v. City of Mobile, 17 Ala. App. 145, 82 So. 635; Jackson v. City of Mobile, 16 Ala. App. 664, 81 So. 184; Hannibal v. City of Mobile, 16 Ala. App. 625, 80 So. 629; Clark v. City of Uniontown, 4 Ala. App. 264, 58 So. 725. The foregoing authorities by the Court of Appeals appear not to have been approved by this court.

The cases of Feagin v. City of Andalusia, 12 Ala. App. 611,67 So. 630, and Cooper v. City of Gadsden, 10 Ala. App. 609,65 So. 715, bear analogy to the decision in Thomas v. City of Mobile, 203 Ala. 96, 82 So. 110.

The writ was properly denied, and the application for rehearing is overruled.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.