Supreme Court of Alabama, 1942

Wetzel v. Bessemer Bar Ass'n.

Supreme Court of Alabama · Decided January 15, 1942 · No. 6 Div. 947. · Thomas, Gardner, Brown, Foster

5 So. 2d 722; 242 Ala. 164; 1942 Ala. LEXIS 12 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

22 later published cases cite this decision.

Ex Parte Hennies (Ala. Ct. App. 1947)
Carter v. State Ex Rel. Bullock County (Ala. 1981)
United States Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Local 7918 United Mine Workers of America (Ala. Crim. App. 1971)
Local 612, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Bowman Transportation, Inc. (Ala. 1964)
Nelson v. Darling Shop of Birmingham, Inc. (Ala. 1963)
Shuttlesworth v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1962)
Parker v. Reaves (Ala. 1988)
Opinion by the Clerk (Ala. 1980)
Parmer v. Parmer (Ala. 1979)
Johnson v. Johnson (Ala. Civ. App. 1975)
Knight v. State ex rel. Butler (Ala. 1972)
Jones v. Kendrick Realty Co. (Ala. 1971)
Lovelady v. Lovelady (Ala. 1968)
Ex Parte Abercrombie (Ala. 1965)
Ex Parte Abercrombie (Ala. 1965)
Jordan v. Jordan (Ala. 1957)
Ex Parte Hacker (Ala. 1947)
Ex Parte Wetzel (Ala. 1942)
Bessemer Bar Ass'n v. Wetzel (Ala. 1942)
Worley v. Worley (Ala. 1958)
Scola v. Scola (Mass. 1945)
Mathews v. Stephenson (Ala. 1942)

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, Justice.

The review of an order made in a proceeding for contempt of court is by way of an appropriate extraordinary writ and not by appeal. 13 Corpus Juris 101; 17 C.J.S., Contempt, § 117; In re James H. Willis et al., post, p. 284, 5 So.2d 716.

It may be said that the remedy for review in contempt proceedings is by certiorari if the party in contempt is not in prison and by habeas corpus if the party in contempt is in prison. Robertson v. State, 20 Ala.App. 514, 104 So. 561; Ex parte Bankhead, 200 Ala. 102, 75 So. 478; Ex parte Dickens, 162 Ala. 272, 50 So. 218. For annotations on review in civil contempt see 28 A.L.R. 33.

The appellant has not pursued the proper remedy. In re James H. Willis et al., supra; Ex parte Connor et al., 240 Ala. 327, 198 So. 850; Board of Revenue of Covington County v. Merrill, 193 Ala. 521, 68 So. 971; Ex parte Dickens, 162 Ala. 272, 277, 50 So. 218, supra; Easton v. State, 39 Ala. 551, 87 Am.Dec. 49.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is well taken and the appeal is dismissed on the grounds of the lack of jurisdiction.

The motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

GARDNER, C. J., BROWN, and FOSTER, JJ., concur.

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