History
  • No items yet
midpage
Trousdale v. Bedingfield
167 So. 925
| Ala. Ct. App. | 1936
|
Check Treatment

We find no assignment of error argued and insisted upon in the way and manner outlined as requisite in our opinion in the case of Great Atlantic Pacific Tea Co. v. Smalley,26 Ala. App. 176, 156 So. 639.

What we said in the above opinion seems to have had the approval of our Supreme Court. Great Atlantic Pacific Tea Co. v. Smalley, 229 Ala. 289, 156 So. 641.

Hence we must hold, and do hold, that there is nothing before us for review. And the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Trousdale v. Bedingfield
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Mar 24, 1936
Citation: 167 So. 925
Docket Number: 8 Div. 314.
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.
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.