Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Cox

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 21, 1935No. 6 Div. 737PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOSTER, Justice.

This petition shows that the suit is within the ordinary jurisdiction of the circuit court; that a motion was made in it to determine whether defendant had such interest in the property levied on as that it was subject to levy by attachment. That court heard and determined that defendant did have such interest. It had the power and jurisdiction to do so. This petition is virtually an effort to review that ruling.

In the case of Anders v. Lindsey, 203 Ala. 48, 82 So. 8, this court observed:

“The writ of prohibition cannot be made to serve the purpose of the writ of certiorari to…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Smith v. WhitneySupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Ex parte RoundtreeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1874
  3. Ex parte SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
  4. Ex parte GreeneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1856
  5. Ex parte SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ex Parte BurchSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
  2. Ex Parte Textile Workers Union of AmericaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1947
  3. J. Blach & Sons, Inc. v. HawkinsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
  4. Donahoo v. St. JohnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
  5. Ex Parte BennettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935

1 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