The Law Lion Logo - AI-powered legal writing assistantThe Law Lion
Home
Features
Pricing
Services
AboutBlogCasesContact
Login
Ask Law Lion AI
  1. Home
  2. >Cases
  3. >Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
Supreme Court of Alabama

Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch

4 Div. 94.·Judge: Anderson, Gardner, Miller, Sayre·Attorney: Frank B. Brieken, of Luverne, and Powell & Hamilton, of Greenville, for appellant., James J. Mayfield, of Montgomery, for appellees.0 citations·Filed May 22, 1924

Table of Contents

  • Summary of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
  • Key Issues of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
  • Key Facts of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
  • Decision of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • This is the second appeal in this case, and the decree from which this appeal...

Table of Contents

  • Summary of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
  • Key Issues of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
  • Key Facts of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
  • Decision of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch
  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • This is the second appeal in this case, and the decree from which this appeal...

Summary of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch

This is the second appeal in the case, where the decree conformed to the court's previous opinion. The appeal questions the soundness of the prior opinion, effectively serving as a second rehearing application. The court reaffirmed its prior decision, affirming the circuit court's decree.

Key Issues of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch

  • Soundness of the previous opinion
  • Second application for rehearing

Key Facts of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch

  • This is the second appeal in the case
  • The decree conformed to the previous opinion

Decision of the case Bank of Luverne v. Reddoch

Affirmed

Opinions

This is the second appeal in this case, and the decree from which this appeal was taken conformed to the opinion of the court. 207 Ala. 297, 92 So. 848, 25 A.L.R. 381. This appeal, therefore, involves the soundness of said opinion, and is in the nature of a second application for rehearing. The former appeal was carefully considered by the section of the court then sitting on the original hearing and upon rehearing and has been duly considered by the other section, before whom the second appeal was argued, and while we are not unmindful of section 5965 of the Code, providing that the former opinion must not be regarded as conclusive, we think that the same is sound and adhere thereto. The decree of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed. ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE, GARDNER, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

The Law Lion logoThe Law Lion.

The Law Lion is the only platform combining AI legal writing grounded in real case law with an expert human writing service — serving attorneys, paralegals, and everyday people nationwide.

info@thelawlion.com
Mon–Fri 9am–6pm EST · Rush available
Serving Clients Nationwide

AI Tool

  • → AI Legal Writing Tool
  • → AI Document Drafting
  • → Motion Drafting
  • → Contract Drafting
  • → Legal Research
  • → Case Law Search
  • → Citation Generator
  • → Document Review
  • → Contract Review
  • → For Lawyers

Writing Service

  • → Eviction Defense
  • → Court Documents
  • → Custody & Family
  • → Divorce Documents
  • → Debt & Collections
  • → All Writing Services

Top Guides

  • → Eviction Response Guide
  • → Best AI Legal Tools 2026
  • → Debt Validation Letter Guide

Company

  • → About The Law Lion
  • → Client Results
  • → Transparent Pricing
  • → Legal Guides & Blog
  • → Contact & Free Consult
  • → Affiliate Program

Top Services

  • → Eviction Notice Response
  • → Debt Validation Letter
  • → Court Summons Response
© 2026 The Law Lion LLC · AI Legal Writing & Expert Document Service
Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceSitemap