Gray v. Burdette
Supreme Court of Alabama
Certiorari to Court of Appeals. Petition by William Gray for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of said court rendered on the appeal in the case of William Gray v. W. H. Burdette, 86 South. 95. The Court of Appeals erroneously construed the provisions of section 4695, Code 1907, in holding that it applied, not only to the cultivation, but also to the finishing of the crop. 84 Ala. 80, 4 South. 19. The only review permitted here…
Read the full summary
Certiorari to Court of Appeals. Petition by William Gray for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of said court rendered on the appeal in the case of William Gray v. W. H. Burdette, 86 South. 95. The Court of Appeals erroneously construed the provisions of section 4695, Code 1907, in holding that it applied, not only to the cultivation, but also to the finishing of the crop. 84 Ala. 80, 4 South. 19. The only review permitted here is the proper construction of the statute, and the opinion of the court is a sufficient answer to the contention of…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.
[1] Since this court, in the exercise of its revisory power (Const. § 140) over the proceedings, judgments, etc., of the Court of Appeals, will not review the findings of fact made by that court, or the application of the law to the facts found by that court (Ex parte Steverson, 177 Ala. 384, 389, 58 South. 992, and Ex parte Barrett Shipping Co., 196 Ala. 655, 72 South. 259, among others), the only question that may be considered on the hearing of this application for certiorari is the construction of Code, § 4795, which, as presently pertinent, reads:
“Agricultural laborers and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ex parte SteversonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
- Ex parte Barrett Bros. ShippingSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
3Cited by2 opinions
- First Nat. Bank of Stevenson v. CrawfordAlabama Court of Appeals · 1933
- Smith v. HaleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1923