Legal Opinion
Ex Parte Jagger Coal Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided January 17, 1924No. 6 Div. 13PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
The petition is for certiora-ri, and presents for review the several questions we shall consider.
The first assignment of error challenges the sufficiency of the decree of the trial court, in that it did not “contain a statement of the law and facts and conclusions as determined by 'the judge” in compliance with the procedure prescribed by statute in “cases of dispute,” etc. Gen. Acts 1919, p. 227, § 28. The provisions of the statute were considered in Woodward Iron Co. v. Bradford, 206 Ala. 447, 90 South. 803, and it was declared that “conclusions of the judge supported by any of the evidence…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Woodward Iron Co. v. BradfordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Greek v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Ex Parte Louisville N. R. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Ex Parte Majestic Coal Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Ex Parte W. T. Smith Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1921
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Bass v. Cowikee MillsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1953
- Ex Parte Big Four Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1925
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
- West Point Manufacturing Co. v. BennettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- Woodward Iron Co. v. VinesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.