Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

213 Ala. 551

105 So 711

Ex Parte Thorne

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 15, 1925

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1925-10-15

Relies on Anniston Mfg. Co. v. So. R'y Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1925-10-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 1987

7 state decisions

201925193019401950196019701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 We think the statement in the opinion .of the Court of Appeals that refused charges requested in writing by defendant cannot be reviewed, where the bill of exceptions fails to disclose that it contains all the evidence, is too broad and needs some qualification. There may be refused charges which should properly be reviewed, though all the evidence does not appear, such as charges in no manner affected by that fact. Anniston Mfg. Co. v. Southern Ry. Co., 145 Ala. 351, 40 So. 965.

¶2 But the petition and brief in this cause do not point out that any refused charges in the instant case come within that class, and none of the charges are here discussed. . Supreme Court rule 44, vol. 4, Code 1923. Under these circumstances we assume, in favor of the ruling of the.Court of Appeals, that the refused charges are not reviewable for the reason pointed out by that court. .

¶3 Let the .writ he denied.

¶4 Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. J„ and SAYRE, GARDNER, and MILLER, JJ„ concur.
/213/ala/551 · .json · Public domain