Court Opinion

ID: 9825509
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 13:16:07.035778+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:40:55.887725
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
We are now asked to pass upon the liability of the sux-ety on appellant’s supersedeas bond, in view of the fact that the original judgment of this court was that the judgment of the trial court is reversed and a judgment here rendered for the amount of recovery to which the plaintiff was entitled.
This judgment was a mere correction of the judgment of the circuit court. The evidence being without conflict as to the right of recovex'y and the amount, this court proceeded to render a corrected judgment. That the form of the judgment is reversed and remanded is of no moment; the effect is to affirm the judgment in favor of plaintiff and correct the amount and render judgment for the amount as corrected. Montgomery L. & W. P. Co. v. Thombs, 204 Ala. 678, 87 So. 205; Ashley v. Hill, 21 Ala. App. 603, 110 So. 597; New York L. Ins. Co. v. Reese, 201 Ala. 673, 79 So. 245; 4 Corpus Juris, 1274 (3362).
The effect of the judgment being an affirmance of defendant’s liability and a correction of the amount of recovery, the surety on the supersedeas bond is liable to judgment under Code 1923, § 6153. Sanders v. Rives, 3 Stew. 109.
Let judgmexxt be rendered agaiixst appellants and the sureties on the supersedeas bond, but without costs of appeal or penalty.