Cases Released December 21, 2007

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

Jacobs v. Whaley

University of South Alabama Hospitals v. Blackmon

Folks v. Tuscaloosa County Credit Union

Reynolds v. Wood

Dyess, et al. v. Bay John Developers II, L.L.C.

 

From the Supreme Court of Alabama:

Ex parte Smith Wrecker Service, Inc. and Frey, In re: Jackson v. Smith Wrecker Service, Inc.

Ex parte Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc., In re: Andrews v. Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc., et al.

Paragon Limited, Inc. v. Boles

Ex parte Psychomedics Corporation, In re: Long v. Psychomedics Corporation

Kult v. Kelly

Special Assets, L.L.C. v. Chase Home Finance, L.L.C.

Ex parte Hollis & Wright, P.C., et al., In re: Gadson, et al. v. United Wisconsin Life Insurance Company, et al.

Ehl v. DiChiara

Raley v. Main, as finance director of the State of Alabama, et al.

A Post-Judgment Motion Which Has Become Moot Is Not Deemed Denied by Rule 59.1; Alternative Grounds for a Rule 59 Motion Are Not Waived if Not Asserted on Appeal

In HIlb, Rogal & Hamilton v. Beirsdoerfer, No. 1060522, released December 14, the Supreme Court held that post-judgment motions which have become mooted are not subject to denial by operation of Rule 59.1.  The court also concluded, in a matter of first impression, that a party who fails to raise its remittitur arguments on appeal from the grant of a motion for a new trial in its favor does not waive those arguments.

Continue reading

Cases Released on December 14, 2007

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

Bailey v. Sawyer

City of Mobile v. Pinto Island Land Company, Inc.

Werner Company v. Davidson

Alamo v. PCH Hotels and Resorts, Inc. d/b/a Mariott’s Grand Hotel

Britt v. Britt

Kendrick v. Earl’s, Incorporated et al.

Montiel v. Estate of Gonzalo F. Montiel and Mobile Memorial Gardens, Inc.

From the Alabama Supreme Court:

Painter v. McWane Cast Iron Pipe Company

Hilb, Rogal & Hamilton Company et al. v. Beiersdoerfer

Carraway v. Kurtts 

Ore Tenus Presumption of Correctness Heightened in Boundary Line and Adverse Possession Cases

In a routine case, when the trial court hears the evidence ore tenus, an appellate court presumes that the trial court’s findings based upon that testimony are correct. When the dispute at issue is a boundary line dispute or a case concerning adverse possession, the presumption of correctness is enhanced, particularly “if the trial court personally views the property in dispute.” Shirey v. Pitman, No. 2060574 (Ala. Civ. App. Nov. 30, 2007).

Court of Civil Appeals Reviews Denial of Summary Judgment

Although an appellate court ordinarily will not review an appeal from the denial of a motion for summary judgment, the Court of Civil Appeals reviewed the trial court’s denial of Vulcan Lands’ motion for summary judgment in its attempt to obtain a franchise tax refund from the State of Alabama.  Vulcan Lands, Inc. v. Surtees, No. 2060607 (Ala. Civ. App. Nov. 30, 2007).

 

Continue reading

Cases Released December 7, 2007

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

Barbaree v. Barbaree

Hernandez v. City of Hoover

T.O.B. v. C.J.B.

Wade v. State of Alabama

 

From the Supreme Court of Alabama:

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

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

Ex parte Partners in Care, Inc., In re: Sherman v. Partners in Care, Inc.

Ex parte Phil Bowman, In re: Heard v. APV North America, Inc., et al.

Ex parte Deborah R. Tisdale, In re: Tisdale v. State of Alabama

Van Hoof v. Van Hoof

Muhammad v. Representative Ford and Warren, sheriff of Macon County

Court Decides Question of First Impression in Workers’ Comp Case

The Court of Civil appeals decided the following question of first impression in Burton & Assoc, Ltd. v. Morris, No. 2060802  (Ala. Civ. App. Nov. 30, 2007):  “when two states both have grounds for asserting jurisdiction over a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, do payments of compensation made to the injured worker under the laws of one of the states toll the statute of limitations as to a claim later filed in the other state?”

Continue reading