Case Title: Mid-State Homes, Inc. v. Roberts

Citation: 257 So. 2d 333

Docket Number: 

State: alabama

Court: Alabama Supreme Court

Date: 1972-01-27T00:00:00Z

Document:
257 So. 2d 333 (1972)
MID-STATE HOMES, INC., a Corporation
v.
Willie ROBERTS and Rose Roberts.
2 Div. 543.

Supreme Court of Alabama.
January 27, 1972.
*334 R. A. Norred, Birmingham, for appellant.
Hubbard & Waldrop, Tuscaloosa, O. S. Burke, Greensboro, for appellees.
BLOODWORTH, Justice.
This case has been submitted to the court on motion to dismiss the appeal and on the merits.
Appeal was taken from a final decree of the circuit court of Hale County, in equity, declaring void a certain note and mortgage executed by appellees to Jim Walter Corporation and assigned by it to appellant.
Appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal is grounded on their averments that no "Citation of Appeal" was ever issued by the register of the circuit court of Hale County, in equity, nor has such citation been served on either of them or on their attorney.
Omitting the caption, and certificate of service, the transcript shows the following "Citation on Appeal," viz.:
"R. A. Norred
Section 801, Title 7, Code of Alabama 1940, requires as follows:
In the instant case no citation was ever issued by the register, as required by the statute. This court specifically held in Bowlin v. Bowlin, 267 Ala. 655, 104 So. 2d 630 (1958), that an attorney's "Notice of Appeal" "is not a compliance with Sec. 801, supra." There was no citation issued in Bowlin.
*335 A recent holding of this court, in Lovelady v. Thomas, 273 Ala. 246, 139 So. 2d 335 (1962), is dispositive of the motion on the point that the register's "citation of appeal" was never served:
The appeal must, therefore, be dismissed on these authorities.
We think it is not inappropriate at this point to quote the observation made in Lovelady v. Thomas, supra, after the court had acted to dismiss that appeal, viz:
Appeal dismissed.
HEFLIN, C. J., and LAWSON, COLEMAN and McCALL, JJ., concur.
HEFLIN, Chief Justice (concurring):
This case has been decided on a technicality, rather than on its merits. Act No. 964, Acts of Alabama, 1971, Regular Session, approved September 7, 1971, conferred upon the Supreme Court of Alabama broad rule-making power to adopt a new system of rules to govern procedure in appellate practice. This Act, which recites that its purpose is to promote the speedy determination of litigation in the appellate courts on its merits, specifically states that the Supreme Court may disregard any laws, rules of court, and court decisions which may be inconsistent with any new rule or rules insofar as the same may be done constitutionally. For the purpose of aiding and assisting this Court in formulating such new system of rules, an Advisory Committee has been appointed. This committee is presently working on this task. Hopefully, such new system of rules will prevent decisions on a technicality such as was involved in this case. Pending the opportunity to adopt such new system of rules in an orderly fashion following the receipt of recommendations from such Advisory Committee, I fell I must follow the prior decisions of this Court. Therefore, I concur in the opinion of Bloodworth, J.