The Department of Conservation and Natural Resources shall be headed by and shall be under the direction, supervision and control of an officer who shall be known and designated as the Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources. The Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources shall be the advisor of the Governor and the Legislature in matters relating to the wildlife and other natural resources and the state parks and monument and historical sites of the State of Alabama and the discovery, development, protection and conservation thereof. He shall be responsible to the Governor for the administration of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. The Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources shall be appointed and shall hold office at the pleasure of the Governor. Vacancies for any reason shall be filled in the same manner as original appointments are made. Before entering upon the discharge of his duties, the Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources shall take the constitutional oath of office and shall give bond in such penalty as may be fixed by the Governor, but such penalty shall not be less than $10,000.00 conditioned upon the faithful discharge of his duties. The premiums on such bond shall be paid out of the State Treasury. The Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources shall devote full time to his office and shall not hold another office under the government of the United States or under any other state or of this state or any political subdivision thereof during his incumbency in such office, and shall not hold any position of trust or profit or engage in any occupation or business the conduct of which shall interfere or be inconsistent with his duties as Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources under the provisions of this title.
(Acts 1939, No. 162, p. 255, §6; Code 1940, T. 8, §5; Acts 1951, Ex. Sess., No. 9, p. 175, §1.)
Notes of Decisions
Shawnee Terminal R.R. v. J.E. Estes Wood Co., 42 So. 3d 104 (Ala. 2010).
· cites it 2× “§ 9-2-5(a) (Michie 1982). However, these statutes merely codified the principle expressed in the common-law maxim: `Nemo debet bis vexari (si constet curiae quod sit) pro una et eadem causa,' that is: `No man ought to be twice troubled or harassed (if it appear to the court that…”
Ex Parte State Mut. Ins. Co., 715 So. 2d 207 (Ala. 1997).
“§ 9-2-5(a) (Michie 1982). However, these statutes merely codified the principle expressed in the common-law maxim: "Nemo debet bis vexari (si constet curiae quod sit) pro una et eadem causa," that is: "No man ought to be twice troubled or harassed (if it appear to the court that…”
API Holdings, LLC v. Frost Cummings Tidwell Grp., LLC, 164 So. 3d 1089 (Ala. 2014).
“§ 9-2-5 (a) (Michie 1982). However, these statutes merely codified the principle expressed in the common-law maxim: “Nemo debet bis vexari (si constet curiae quod sit) pro una et eadem causa,” that is: “No man ought to be twice troubled or harassed (if it appear to the court…”
Kelley v. White, 516 So. 2d 1386 (Ala. Civ. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “The Department contends that the trial court erred in that such ruling is contrary to the legislative intent of this statute and §§ 9-2-5 and -6, Code 1975, which give the Commissioner broad powers to administer the functions and duties of the Department and its employees.”
— Ala. Code § 9-2-5(a) — 2 cases
Shawnee Terminal R.R. v. J.E. Estes Wood Co., 42 So. 3d 104 (Ala. 2010).
“§ 9-2-5(a) (Michie 1982). However, these statutes merely codified the principle expressed in the common-law maxim: `Nemo debet bis vexari (si constet curiae quod sit) pro una et eadem causa,' that is: `No man ought to be twice troubled or harassed (if it appear to the court that…”
Ex Parte State Mut. Ins. Co., 715 So. 2d 207 (Ala. 1997).
“§ 9-2-5(a) (Michie 1982). However, these statutes merely codified the principle expressed in the common-law maxim: "Nemo debet bis vexari (si constet curiae quod sit) pro una et eadem causa," that is: "No man ought to be twice troubled or harassed (if it appear to the court that…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.