From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Duke v. Barth

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jan 18, 1962
136 So. 2d 927 (Ala. 1962)

Opinion

5 Div. 739.

January 18, 1962.

Appeal from the County Court, Chilton County, J. B. Atkinson, J.

Francis W. Speaks, Speaks Burnett, Clanton, for appellant.

Omar L. Reynolds, Reynolds Reynolds, Clanton, for appellee.


This cause was submitted here on motion of the appellee to dismiss the appeal and on the merits.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is based on the ground that the transcript of the record was not timely filed in this court.

This being an equity case, the transcript of the record should have been filed in this court within sixty days from the date on which the appeal was taken. Supreme Court Rule 37, as amended.

It was not filed within that time. No application for extension of time was made in the lower court or in this court. We are constrained, therefore, to grant appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal. Edge v. Edge, 271 Ala. 283, 123 So.2d 111; Smith v. Alverson, 270 Ala. 628, 120 So.2d 898; Ridgeway v. Lovelady, 268 Ala. 503, 108 So.2d 459.

Appeal dismissed.

LIVINGSTON, C. J., and STAKELY and MERRILL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Duke v. Barth

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jan 18, 1962
136 So. 2d 927 (Ala. 1962)
Case details for

Duke v. Barth

Case Details

Full title:Esther V. DUKE v. A. W. BARTH, as Executor

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Jan 18, 1962

Citations

136 So. 2d 927 (Ala. 1962)
136 So. 2d 927

Citing Cases

Jones v. Shoemaker

In an equity case appealed to the Supreme Court the transcript must be filed in the Clerk's office within…

Frazier v. Frazier

(Emphasis supplied.) In Duke v. Barth, 273 Ala. 178, 136 So.2d 927, the Court, speaking through Mr. Justice…