From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Underwood v. Underwood

Supreme Court of Alabama
Dec 24, 1917
77 So. 233 (Ala. 1917)

Opinion

4 Div. 691.

November 15, 1917. Rehearing Denied December 24, 1917.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Houston County; O. S. Lewis, Chancellor.

B. F. Reid, of Dothan, Steiner, Crum Weil, and Rushton, Williams Crenshaw, all of Montgomery, for appellant. F. M. Gaines, T. M. Espy, and Farmer Farmer, all of Dothan, for appellee.


In this case the chancellor has filed his opinion, in which he very fully and clearly reviews the evidence and applies the settled principles of law to the conclusions he has reached upon the issues of fact presented. We have likewise carefully reviewed the evidence in the light of the elaborate arguments presented by counsel, and we think the findings and decree of the chancellor should be affirmed.

The evidence is very voluminous, and sharply conflicting in some of its most material aspects. Much may be and has been plausibly said in impeachment of the chancellor's findings. For the satisfaction of counsel we would like to analyze and discuss the evidence in detail, but, in accordance with our present policy in deciding questions of fact (see Acts 1915, pp. 594, 595, § 3), we must simply announce our conclusion.

Let the decree of the chancery court be affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and MAYFIELD and THOMAS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Underwood v. Underwood

Supreme Court of Alabama
Dec 24, 1917
77 So. 233 (Ala. 1917)
Case details for

Underwood v. Underwood

Case Details

Full title:UNDERWOOD v. UNDERWOOD et al

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Dec 24, 1917

Citations

77 So. 233 (Ala. 1917)
200 Ala. 690

Citing Cases

Pilcher v. Surles

Since the act of 1915 (page 594) it has been the policy of this court not to enter into any analysis or…

Koger v. State

The evidence has been carefully considered by the court in consultation, and a discussion of it here would…