"[O]ur Supreme Court has held 'that failure to serve the attorney general "goes to the jurisdiction of the court," that the "absence of jurisdiction is apparent on the face of the record," and that we must take notice of our own want of jurisdiction.' "
How later courts described this case
- "[O]ur Supreme Court has held 'that failure to serve the attorney general "goes to the jurisdiction of the court," that the "absence of jurisdiction is apparent on the face of the record," and that we must take notice of our own want of jurisdiction.' "
- "If the party challenging the constitutionality of a statute fails to serve the attorney general, as required by Ala. Code 1975, § 6-6-227, the trial court has no jurisdiction to decide the constitutional claims."
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ROBERTSON, Presiding Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent to the dismissal of this appeal. The Employees raise an issue regarding the Board’s failure to give them notice of their right to appeal within five days. That issue is properly before this court and should be addressed.