Legal Opinion

Wetzel v. Birmingham Electric Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 15, 1948No. 6 Div. 547PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BROWN, Justice.

After final judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s case for want of prosecution, he made motion to set aside the judgment of dismissal on the ground that he had a meritorious case and had no notice that the case was set for trial. The motion was overruled.

There is nothing in the motion to show that the plaintiff was misled by any action of the court or its officers or by the adverse party. Williams v. Tyler, 14 Ala. App. 591, 71 So. 51; Ex parte Tyler, 198 Ala. 696, 73 So. 1002. As the aggressive party in the case it was plaintiff’s duty to follow his case in all of its steps…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Williams v. TylerAlabama Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Hamrick v. Town of AlbertvilleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
  3. Redd Chemical & Nitrate Co. v. W. T. Clay Mercantile Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1929
  4. Ex parte TylerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  5. Carmichael v. J. C. Jones & Bro.Alabama Court of Appeals · 1917

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Bowman v. SladeCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1987
  2. Averett v. AverettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1951
  3. Ingram v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2006
  4. Ex Parte MaplesCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2004
  5. Irvin v. FordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1951

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API