History
  • No items yet
midpage
Channell v. Channell
257 Ala. 85
Ala.
1952
Check Treatment

The circuit court in equity on final hearing denied relief to appellant who sought a divorce, and granted relief to appellee on her cross-bill seeking an allowance for the support of herself and child. Such a decree was within the power of the court and is subject to review on appeal. Lyall v. Lyall,250 Ala. 635, 35 So.2d 550; Ex parte Tucker, 254 Ala. 222,48 So.2d 24.

The trial of both issues was made on the testimony of witnesses examined orally in the presence of the trial judge. Therefore, the decree should not be reversed unless palpably wrong. Sills v. Sills, 246 Ala. 165, 19 So.2d 521.

Many of the assignments of error are based on the denial of a motion to set aside the final decree and grant a rehearing. But they are not available in equity by reason of Rule 62 of Equity Practice, Code 1940, Tit. 7 Appendix. Valenzuela v. Sellers, 253 Ala. 142(3), 43 So.2d 121.

However, on appeal from a final decree in equity we would reverse it on the same principle which would justify granting a motion to set aside a verdict and judgment at law on the ground that it is contrary to the great preponderance of the evidence and, therefore, that it is palpably wrong.

We think that no good could be accomplished by discussing the evidence on that issue. We are not willing to reverse the decree on that basis.

Affirmed.

LIVINGSTON, C. J., and SIMPSON and GOODWYN, JJ., concur. *Page 86

Case Details

Case Name: Channell v. Channell
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Mar 10, 1952
Citation: 257 Ala. 85
Docket Number: 6 Div. 335
Court Abbreviation: Ala.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.