History
  • No items yet
midpage
O'Neal v. Kelly
72 Ala. 559
Ala.
1882
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

-At one time, there was some conflict in the decisions of this court, as to the proper mode of introducing here, for revision, the action of the City or Circuit Courts in granting or refusing applications for a rehearing under the statute. — Code of 1876, §§ 3160-61. To remove all uncertainty, in Ex parte North (49 Ala. 385), following the earlier decisions, it was announced, that from a judgment refusing the application for a rehearing an appeal would lie, because that judgment is final, disposing of the case; but, if the application was erroneously granted, the order granting it was not a final judgment — its effect was, not a disposition of the case, but its restoration to the docket for a new trial; and prior to final judgment, the only remedy for the correction of the error is-mandamus. This is the practice which has. been since pursued—Heflyn v. Rock Mills, 58 Ala. 613.

The motion to dismiss the present appeal, taken from an order granting a rehearing, must, therefore, be sustained.

Case Details

Case Name: O'Neal v. Kelly
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Dec 15, 1882
Citation: 72 Ala. 559
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.