J. P. Gordon Et Ux. v. State Alabama

SIMPSON, Justice. This is a condemnation proceeding in Blount County, seeking the condemnation of certain lands of appellants
for the purpose of constructing a new state highway between Oneonta and Birmingham, Alabama. Appellants, being dissatisfied
with the amount awarded them, appealed the case to the Circuit Court of Blount County where a trial de novo was had. Prior
to the trial, the parties stipulated that the sole issue to be submitted to the jury was the amount of damages and compensation,
if any, to which the appellants were entitled as a result of the condemnation. The jury returned a verdict in favor of appellants
and fixed the compensation due them. A judgment was entered on such verdict. Appellants, still being dissatisfied with the
amount of the award, thereupon filed a motion for a new trial which was overruled. They now bring this appeal. Some eighteen errors are assigned. Primarily, these assignments conveniently fall into three categories, each of which deals
with the same question of law. First are the assignments of error dealing with the admission of evidence. Secondly, assignments
of error 4 and 10 charging the lower court with improper remarks during the trial. No objection was taken, or exception reserved,
by the appellants to these statements of the court; hence, our review is not invited. State v. Boyd, 271 Ala. 584, 126 So.2d
225. Thirdly, assignments of error connected with the trial court's refusal to grant a new trial, the basis of which was the
inadequacy of the damages awarded and the contention that the verdict rendered was against the great weight of the evidence.
We see no reason to treat each assignment separately. It has long been established that this court will not search for error
not specifically assigned and argued in brief (which seems to be the case here), but merely touched upon in general propositions
and without specific application. Suits v. Glover, 260 Ala. 449, 71 So.2d 49, 43 A.L.R.2d 465.