unvarying rule in Alabama

1957Trust, Inc., v. East, 217 Ala. 626 , 117 So. 160, 161 , it was observed that: ‘It has been the unvarying rule of this court since the decision in Pruitt v. McWhorter (1883), 74 Ala. 315 , not to consider documents put in evidence in the trial court and transmitted to this court unless copied into the transcript.’ See, also, Missouri State Life Ins.

1932Trust, Inc., v. East, 217 Ala. 626 , 117 So. 160, 161 , it was observed that: “It has been the unvarying rule of this court since the decision in Pruitt v. McWhorter (1883), 74 Ala. 315 , not to consider documents put in evidence in the trial court and transmitted to this court unless copied into the transcript.” See, also, Missouri State Life Ins.

1957Trust, Inc., v. East, 217 Ala. 626 , 117 So. 160, 161 , it was observed that: ‘It has been the unvarying rule of this court since the decision in Pruitt v. McWhorter (1883), 74 Ala. 315 , not to consider documents put in evidence in the trial court and transmitted to this court unless copied into the transcript.’ See, also, Missouri State Life Ins.

1957Trust, Inc., v. East, 217 Ala. 626 , 117 So. 160, 161 , it was observed that: ‘It has been the unvarying rule of this court since the decision in Pruitt v. McWhorter (1883), 74 Ala. 315 , not to consider documents put in evidence in the trial court and transmitted to this court unless copied into the transcript.’ See, also, Missouri State Life Ins.

1957Co. v. Stuckey, [ 224 Ala. 590 ], 141 So. 246 , 248, where it was held that compliance with the rule (Supreme Court Rule 24) [Rule 22, Revised Rules effective June 1, 1955] cannot be waived by the parties because ‘the matter presented affected the court and its procedure.’ The reason for the rule and its strict application is that the record on appeal becomes the permanent record of the court in the particular case, and is bound and filed in its permanent archives.

1957Co. v. Stuckey, [ 224 Ala. 590 ], 141 So. 246 , 248, where it was held that compliance with the rule (Supreme Court Rule 24) [Rule 22, Revised Rules effective June 1, 1955] cannot be waived by the parties because ‘the matter presented affected the court and its procedure.’ The reason for the rule and its strict application is that the record on appeal becomes the permanent record of the court in the particular case, and is bound and filed in its permanent archives.

1985The Jones Act cases involving coverage are similar in this respect to many negligence and contributory negligence cases." The court set forth the following test: "[T]here is an evidentiary basis for a Jones Act case to go to the jury: (1) if there is evidence that the injured workman was assigned permanently to a vessel (including special purpose structures not usually employed as a means of transport by water but designed to float on water) or performed a substantial part of his work on the vessel; and (2) if the capacity in which he was employed or the duties which he performed contributed t

1972And in our per curiam opinion on rehearing in Inland Mutual Insurance Company v. Hightower, 274 Ala. 52 , 145 So. 2d 422 , we adhered to the doctrine enunciated in Mooradian and held that primary liability could not be created or the cover *312 age of a policy extended by either waiver or estoppel and that there was no estoppel against the assertion of an uninsured trailer exclusion in the policy.

1972And in our per curiam opinion on rehearing in Inland Mutual Insurance Company v. Hightower, 274 Ala. 52 , 145 So. 2d 422 , we adhered to the doctrine enunciated in Mooradian and held that primary liability could not be created or the cover *312 age of a policy extended by either waiver or estoppel and that there was no estoppel against the assertion of an uninsured trailer exclusion in the policy.

1927Wright v. Dunklin, 83 Ala. 317 , 3 So. 597 ; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514 , 30 So. 434 ; Southern Railway v. Leard, 146 Ala. 349 , 39 So. 449 ; Darrow v. Barrow, 201 Ala. 477 , 78 So. 383 ; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42 , 109 So. 109 .

1927Wright v. Dunklin, 83 Ala. 317 , 3 So. 597 ; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514 , 30 So. 434 ; Southern Railway v. Leard, 146 Ala. 349 , 39 So. 449 ; Darrow v. Barrow, 201 Ala. 477 , 78 So. 383 ; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42 , 109 So. 109 .

1927Wright v. Dunklin, 83 Ala. 317 , 3 So. 597 ; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514 , 30 So. 434 ; Southern Railway v. Leard, 146 Ala. 349 , 39 So. 449 ; Darrow v. Barrow, 201 Ala. 477 , 78 So. 383 ; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42 , 109 So. 109 .

1927Wright v. Dunklin, 83 Ala. 317 , 3 So. 597 ; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514 , 30 So. 434 ; Southern Railway v. Leard, 146 Ala. 349 , 39 So. 449 ; Darrow v. Barrow, 201 Ala. 477 , 78 So. 383 ; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42 , 109 So. 109 .

1927Wright v. Dunklin, 83 Ala. 317 , 3 So. 597 ; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514 , 30 So. 434 ; Southern Railway v. Leard, 146 Ala. 349 , 39 So. 449 ; Darrow v. Barrow, 201 Ala. 477 , 78 So. 383 ; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42 , 109 So. 109 .

1927Wright v. Dunklin, 83 Ala. 317 , 3 So. 597 ; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514 , 30 So. 434 ; Southern Railway v. Leard, 146 Ala. 349 , 39 So. 449 ; Darrow v. Barrow, 201 Ala. 477 , 78 So. 383 ; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42 , 109 So. 109 .

1927Wright v. Dunklin, 83 Ala. 317 , 3 So. 597 ; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514 , 30 So. 434 ; Southern Railway v. Leard, 146 Ala. 349 , 39 So. 449 ; Darrow v. Barrow, 201 Ala. 477 , 78 So. 383 ; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42 , 109 So. 109 .

1927Wright v. Dunklin, 83 Ala. 317 , 3 So. 597 ; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514 , 30 So. 434 ; Southern Railway v. Leard, 146 Ala. 349 , 39 So. 449 ; Darrow v. Barrow, 201 Ala. 477 , 78 So. 383 ; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42 , 109 So. 109 .

1920Ryall v. Smith, 138 Ala. 145 , 34 So. 1009 ; Ryall v. Epps, 122 Ala. 662 , 26 So. 1033 ; McCrossin v. Davis, 100 Ala. 631 , 13 So. 607 .

1920Ryall v. Smith, 138 Ala. 145 , 34 South. 1009 ; Ryall v. Epps, 122 Ala. 662 , 26 South. 1033 ; McCrossin v. Davis, 100 Ala. 631 , 13 South. 607 .

1920Ryall v. Smith, 138 Ala. 145 , 34 So. 1009 ; Ryall v. Epps, 122 Ala. 662 , 26 So. 1033 ; McCrossin v. Davis, 100 Ala. 631 , 13 So. 607 .

1920Ryall v. Smith, 138 Ala. 145 , 34 South. 1009 ; Ryall v. Epps, 122 Ala. 662 , 26 South. 1033 ; McCrossin v. Davis, 100 Ala. 631 , 13 South. 607 .

1920Ryall v. Smith, 138 Ala. 145 , 34 So. 1009 ; Ryall v. Epps, 122 Ala. 662 , 26 So. 1033 ; McCrossin v. Davis, 100 Ala. 631 , 13 So. 607 .

1920Ryall v. Smith, 138 Ala. 145 , 34 South. 1009 ; Ryall v. Epps, 122 Ala. 662 , 26 South. 1033 ; McCrossin v. Davis, 100 Ala. 631 , 13 South. 607 .

1897In passing upon the constitutionality of statutes, it is a universal rule, that all reasonable presumptions are indulged in favor of legislative action; before sentence of nullity is pronounced against it, the infraction of the Constitution must be clear; and to this unvarying rule, statutes supposed to be violative of this clause of the Constitution are not an exception.- — State v. Rogers, 107 Ala. 444 .

1869It is, therefore, an unvarying rule of equity, that if the trustee invests the moneys of the beneficiary in other property, the courts of chancery will follow it and hold such investment as a security for the repayment of the money thus invested, or decree the property itself to be the property of the beneficiary, and compel a conveyance to accomplish this purpose; unless the interests of bona fide purchasers, without notice, intervene and demand protection.—2 Story Eq. § 977, et seq. ; Adams’ Doct. in Eq., marg. pp. 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 40, et seq.; Pool et al. v. Cummings & Co., 20 Ala. 563 .