Mobile Temperance Hall Ass'n v. Holmes
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Mobile Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. Thomas H. Smith. Bill by Mary E. Holmes and others against the Mobile Temperance Hall Association. Decree for complainants, and respondents appeal.
1Per curiam
(1, 2) The prayer for the appeal is by this appellant in behalf of “itself and all other respondents.” The *438certificate of appeal requires a citation only to the complainants or their solicitors' Messrs. Thornton and McLeod. Therefore the respondents, other than the Mobile Temperance Hall Association, have had no notice of this appeal; but, as the appeal seems to be taken in behalf of all respondents, all of them must be treated as appellants, as there has been no summons and severance prior to the submission of this cause. Indeed, the assignment of errors is made for and in behalf of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Kimbrell v. RogersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Davis v. Vandiver & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1909
- Lillich v. MooreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
3Cited by7 opinions
- Chavers v. MayoSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
- Stacey v. TaliaferroSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Roberts v. KempSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Elliott v. McCraneyAlabama Court of Appeals · 1935
- Sewell v. Cherokee County BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.