
    (106 So. 57)
    Ex parte C. M. McMAHEN & SONS.
    (6 Div. 513.)
    (Supreme Court of Alabama.
    Oct. 29, 1925.)
    1. Appeal and error'<&wkey;>l 012(1) — Where evidence is given ore tenus, finding on evidence not disturbed, unless judgment against weight of evidence, though statute permits review of findings without exceptions thereto.
    Rule that, where evidence is ore tenus, finding of trial court will not be disturbed, unless conclusion and judgment is contrary to great weight of evidence, applies to Code 1907, § 5359, as amended by Acts 1915, p. 824, and recodified as section 8599 of Code 1923, permitting review of findings of trial court on evidence without reserving exceptions thereto.
    2. Appeal and error c&wkey;>io95 — Supreme Court will not review finding of fact made by Court of Appeals.
    Supreme Court will not review finding of fact made by Court of Appeals.
    Certiorari to Court of Appeals.
    Petition of C. M. McMahen & Sons for certiorari to the Court of Appeals "to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in the case of C. M. McMahen & Sons v. L. & N. R. R. Co., 100 So. 56.
    Writ denied.
    M. B. Grace, of Birmingham, for petitioner.
    Jones & Thomas, of Montgomery, and McClellan, Rice & Stone, of Birmingham, opposed.
   THOMAS, J.

The effect of section 5359, Code of 1907, as amended by the act of 1915, p. 824 (and as recodified as section 8599, Code of 1923), was recently adverted to in Fleming v. Moore (Ala. Sup.) 105 So. 679. The rule of Hackett v. Cash, 196 Ala. 403, 406, 72 So. 52, was held applicable to these statutes.

This court has often declared that it will not review the finding of fact made by the Court of Appeals. Ex parte Steverson, 177 Ala. 389, 58 So. 992; Ex parte Williams, 182 Ala. 34, 62 So. 63; Postal Tel.-Cable Co. v. Minderhout, 195 Ala. 420, 71 So. 91; Moragne v. State, 200 Ala. 689, 77 So. 322, L. R. A. 1918E, 948; Ex parte McNeil, 204 Ala. 81, 85 So. 569; Ex parte Sansom, 205 Ala. 54, 87 So. 408; Ex parte Galloway, 209 Ala. 469, 96 So. 369.

The writ is denied.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE and BOULDIN, JJ., concur. 
      
      
         Ante, p. 692.
     