155 So. 858 | Ala. | 1934
While this court incidentally observed in Montgomery Light
Water Power Co. v. Thombs,
If there is a situation in which doubt exists as to the existence of any of them, so that an interpretation is necessary, we may consider the purpose of the statute to aid us in so doing. For that reason, in the case of Montgomery Light Water Power Co. v. Thombs, supra, its purpose was mentioned as an aid to construction. In line with that purpose, it has been uniformly held that the judgment or decree must be affirmed in fact and not merely in form. N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Reese,
Those cases settle the question that those damages are not applicable, when, on the appeal by a defendant in a moneyed judgment, there is a substantial change in the amount or terms of the judgment, as respects appellant.
In this case there was a moneyed decree rendered against Snellings and Phenix-Girard Bank. They each separately appealed by separate supersedeas bonds. The decree was affirmed as to Snellings. Therefore all three of the conditions of section 6153 are shown. *2
On the appeal of Phenix-Girard Bank, the decree was here modified (in effect reversed and rendered), so as to eliminate it from all liability.
But there was no change in the amount or terms of the moneyed decree against Snellings. So that we have no power to exercise a judicial discretion nor occasion for interpretation. The statute is specific and mandatory.
Petition for rehearing is overruled.
ANDERSON, C. J., and GARDNER and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.