# Hill v. State

> Supreme Court of Alabama · April 6, 1939 · 237 Ala. 539

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3234005

## Case

- **Full name:** Hill v. State.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Alabama
- **Decided:** April 6, 1939
- **Citations:** 237 Ala. 539; 187 So. 873; 1939 Ala. LEXIS 259
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Brown
- **Judges:** Anderson, Brown, Knigpit, Thomas
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3234005

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- rejecting promissory estoppel claim because the promise “was not definite but, on the contrary, was entirely indefinite as to terms and time.”

## Opinion text

BROWN, Justice.
The petition seeks to review the Court of Appeals on a conclusion of fact and the application of the law thereto.
As repeatedly ruled, this is beyond the limit of review by the common-law writ of certiorari. Postal Tel.-Cable Co. v. Minderhout, 195 Ala. 420 , 71 So. 91 .
The writ is therefore denied.
ANDERSON, C. J., and THOMAS and KNIGPIT, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3234005. Public record. Not legal advice.