Case ID: ala_139/html/0318-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MoCLELLAN, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Porter et al. v. Martin et al.
    
    
      Motion to dismiss Appeal for Failure, to file transcript.
    
    1. Appeal; when failure to file transcript authorizes a dismissal of the appeal. — Where a transcript is not filed during the term of the Supreme Court to which an appeal is taken, and no order in the cause is asked for or made during the term, the appeal will be dismissed on account of such failure to file the transcript, on motion seasonably made at the next succeeding term of the court.
    Appeal from the Chancery Court of Coffee.
    Heard before the lion. William L. Parks.
    The appeal in this case is prosecuted from a decree dismissing a bill filed by the appellants against the appel-lees, for the want of equity, on motion made by the ap-pellees. In this court there was a motion made to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that the record was not filed within the time prescribed by law. The facts in reference to this motion are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
    J. P. Banders, for appellant.
    Riley & Martin and Sollie & Kirkland, contra,
    cited Hears v. Kirksey 81 Ala. 98; Winthrow v. Iron Vo., 81. Ala. 100; Bmjz&r v. McMillan, 13 So. Rep. 144.
   MoCLELLAN, C. J.

The decree in this case dismissing the bill for want of equity was entered on February 13, 1902. The appeal was taken on March 1, 1902. Notice of the appeal was served on the respondent on March 1.2, 1902. The return day of the appeal was the first Monday after the lapse of twenty days from March 12, 1902. At all events the record should have1, been filed in this court on Monday of the week of the call of the Fourth Division in this court, which was June 2, 1902. In point of fact, the record was not filed in this court until July 5, 1902, after the term to which the appeal was taken. No excuse for this delay is shown. It can not be affirmed that the appellees were not prejudiced by it. The motion to dismiss the appeal for this unwarranted delay in filing the record in this court was seasonably made at the term of the court following the filing of the record here. The motion must prevail — Sears v. Kirksey, 81 Ala. 98; Winthrow & Gordon v. Woodward Iron Co., 81 Ala. 100; Bayzer v. McMillan Mill Co., 105 Ala. 395; 13 So. Rep. 144.

Appeal dismissed.