No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Steven D. Pugh
v.
Virgil Kitson.
v.
Virgil Kitson.
80-728.
Supreme Court of Alabama.
Oct 30, 1981.
Steven D. Pugh, pro se., J. N. Holt, Birmingham, for appellee.
Jones, Torbert, Maddox, Shores, Beatty.
Published
JONES, Justice.
Appellant seeks to challenge on five separate and several grounds the propriety of the trial court’s denial of a new trial.
We have made a thorough and painstaking effort to identify each of .the alleged errors in the record of trial before us. Without exception, none of the issues presented is traceable to a specific adverse ruling by the trial court which was properly preserved for appellate review. See Rule 51, ARCP.
[*83] We affirm.
AFFIRMED.
TORBERT, C. J., and MADDOX, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.