Legal Opinion

City of Homewood v. State, City of Birmingham

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 21, 1978No. 77-103PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

These appeals from summary judgments raise the issue of whether property owners, whose properties were the subject of annexation ordinances of the City of Homewood, are indispensable parties to quo warranto actions seeking to invalidate those ordinances.

There are ten separate summary judgments from which these appeals were taken. The judgments were entered in quo warranto actions filed pursuant to Tit. 7, § 1136, Code 1940 (§ 6-6-591, Code 1975), attacking the validity of ordinances of the City of Homewood annexing parcels of real property of owners who petitioned Homewood to do so pursuant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. City of Hueytown v. Jiffy Chek Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1977
  2. Mead Corp. v. City of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1977
  3. State Ex Rel. City of Birmingham v. City of Tarrant CitySupreme Court of Alabama · 1975

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. City of Birmingham v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1979
  2. State v. Village of Jemez Springs, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Meadows v. City of BirminghamCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1991
  4. BIRMINGHAM PLANNING v. Johnson RealtyCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1997
  5. State Ex Rel. Sweet v. JEMEZ SPRINGSNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API