# Flowers v. City of Birmingham

> Alabama Court of Appeals · May 6, 1919 · 17 Ala. App. 138

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3254533

## Case

- **Full name:** Flowers v. City of Birmingham. [Fn]
- **Court:** Alabama Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** May 6, 1919
- **Citations:** 17 Ala. App. 138; 83 So. 36
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Addendum
- **Judges:** Brown
- **Cited by:** 3 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/3254533

## Opinion text

On Appellant’s Application for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM. ..
[11]
The judgment affirming the judgment of conviction was entered on March 18, 1919, but the sentence was set aside and the cause remanded for resentence. On March 28, 1919, the appellee applied for a rehearing, but for failure of compliance with rule 38 ( 77 South, vii ), requiring appellees to file a brief within ten days after submission, that application was stricken. The court, however, of its own motion, corrected the judgment in so far as it related to the sentence, leaving the judgment in all things affirmed. On May 20, 1919, the appellant filed this application for rehearing, complaining only of such matters as were disposed of by the judgmeht of March 18th, no point being made as to the correctness of the sentence as affirmed. From this statement it clearly appears that the appellant’s application for rehearing comes too late, and an order will be entered, striking the same from the file.
Application stricken.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3254533. Public record. Not legal advice.