There Is Generally No “Motion to Reconsider” Post-Judgment Ruling; Failure to Timely Appeal Initial Post-Judgment Order Bars Review

A husband was turned aside where he appealed, not from the denial of his initial post-judgment motion, but from the denial of his (much later) motion to "reconsider” that initial post-judgment disposition. Rorex v. Rorex, No. 2060232 (Ala. Civ. App.) (July 27, 2007). The trial court’s acts after it denied the first post-judgment motion were “void” and would not support an appeal.

Continue reading

Appeal Dismissed Where Judgment Did Not Adjudicate Motion Left Pending in Earlier Suit

A mother appealed from a judgment, trying to address a motion that had been left unresolved in an earlier suit.  The current judgment did not address that unresolved motion.  Nor did any other ruling.  Lacking a final judgment adjudicating that earlier motion, the Court of Civil Appeals lacked jurisdiction to review the case. Fielding v. Fielding, No. 2060243 (Ala. Civ. App.) (July 27, 2007).

Continue reading

Cases Released July 27, 2007

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

McCartney v. McCartney

Evans v. Evans

A.J.H.T. v. K.O.H.

State of Alabama ex rel. Williams v. Crowe

Brown v. Brown

Fielding v. Fielding

Ladas Land & Development, Inc. v. Merritt and Walding Properties, L.L.P.

Rorex v. Rorex

Henderson v. Henderson


From the Alabama Supreme Court:

Ex parte Mason, In re: State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Mason

Ex parte Bell, In re: Bell v. State of Alabama

McCutcheon v. Slade

Offer of Proof Required to Preserve Review of Ruling Sustaining Evidentiary Objection

Hennis v. Hennis, No 2050713, released by the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals on July 20, shows the consequences of failing to make an offer of proof when the trial court sustains an evidentiary objection.

Continue reading

Cases Released July 20, 2007

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

Hennis v. Hennis

Neeley v. Gateway, Inc.

Easley v. Huntsville-Madison County Public Library

K.E.W. v. T.W.E.

Phillips v. Asplundh Tree Expert Company

Perkins and Talladega County Economic Development Board v. Shelby County ; Shelby County v. Perkins and Talladega County Economic Development Board


From the Alabama Supreme Court:

Parker v. Williams ; Williams v. Parker

Carraway, as executor of the estate of Carraway v. Beverly Enterprises Alabama, Inc., et al.

Ex parte Alabama Department of Transportation, In re: Good Hope Contracting Company, Inc. v. Alabama Department of Transportation

Ex parte Jett, In re: Jett v. State of Alabama

Ex parte Monaghan, In re:  Monaghan v. State of Alabama

City of Pinson, Town of Cleveland, and Town of Highland Lake v. Utilities Board of the City of Oneonta

Law of the Case Doctrine Prevents Review of Prior Ruling

The application of the law of the case doctrine is on display in Stockton v. CKPD Development, No. 1060182 (Ala. July 13, 2007).  In Stockton, the Alabama Supreme Court found that the law of the case doctrine prevented the Court from revisiting a prior ruling from the Court of Civil Appeals which had not been challenged by writ of certiorari.

Continue reading

Cases Released July 13, 2007

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

Hornady Truck Lines, Inc. v. Howard

Arnold v. Arnold

Schreck, individually and as trustee of the trust for the benefit of Schreck v. Friedman and Friedman


From the Supreme Court of Alabama:

Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Board of the City of Montgomery v. Parks, et al.; East Montgomery Water, Sewer & Fire Protection Authority v. Parks, et al.

Stockton, et al. v. CKPD Development Co., Inc.

Ex parte Sheriff Tirey, In re: T.M., as next friend of K.M.M., a minor v. Uptain, et al.

Green Tree-AL, L.L.C. v. Reynolds, Reynolds, and Gamble Properties, L.L.C.

Horton and Reynolds v. Alexander, trustee of Terry Manufacturing Company, Inc.


Judgment for Plaintiff Reversed Where Plaintiff Failed to Dismiss Claims against Defendant’s Agents, and Trial Court did not Give Jury Charge Relating to Agent’s Conduct; Omission Tantamount to Judgment on the Merits for Agents

The Alabama Supreme Court reversed a vicarious liability judgment against the defendant manufactured home seller and rendered judgment for the defendant on plaintiff’s fraud, conversion and wantonness claims.  H & S Homes, L.L.C. v. McDonald, No. 1051556 (Ala. July 6, 2007).   The vicarious liability judgment could not stand without a finding that the defendant’s agents engaged in the misconduct that plaintiff alleged. Although plaintiff abandoned his claims against the agents, he did not obtain a formal dismissal of the claims, and the jury charge did not address the plaintiff’s claims against the agents.

Continue reading