Cases Released February 27, 2009

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

Ex parte G.L.; Petition for Writ of Mandamus (In the Matter of H.C.L., a minor child)

Raybon v. Hall

T.B. v. T.H. and S.H.

Woods v. Federated Mutual Insurance Co.

Rheem Manufacturing Company v. Alabama Department of Revenue

Green v. Green

Magee v. Williams

Holmes v. Holmes

Kellis v. Estate of Schnatz

M.R.J. v. D.R.B.

Complete List of Decisions from the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

 

From the Alabama Supreme Court:

Ex parte McCormick; Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals (In re: McCormick v. Ethridge)

Ex parte Bolton; Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals (In re: James River Corporation v. Bolton)

Ex parte Marshall; Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals (In re: Marshall v. State of Alabama)

Ryan et al. v. Patterson et al.

Complete List of Decisions from the Alabama Supreme Court

Court Underscores Distinction Between Moving for JML and Challenging Jury Charges

A defendant correctly moved at trial for judgment as a matter of law (JML) on the ground that the evidence did not raise a jury question. In arguing that the defendant had to challenge the correctness of the jury charges in order to preserve this JML argument, the plaintiffs were confusing different legal phenomena. Cook’s Pest Control, Inc. v. Rebar, Nos. 1050029, 1050128 (Ala. Feb. 20, 2009).

Continue reading

Notice Filed in Wrong Court, And Not on Form ARAP-1, Nonetheless Secured Appeal

A homeowner filed a notice of appeal that was not on the Form 1 contained in the Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure. Moreover, she mistakenly filed her notice in the county’s district rather than circuit court. However, her notice contained all the information required by law, and the district and circuit courts shared the same clerk. Her notice thus effected a timely appeal. Whorton v. Bruce, No. 2070501 (Ala. Civ. App. Feb. 20, 2009).

Continue reading

Landowner Could “Reasonably Burden” Neighbor’s Easement

The Court of Civil Appeals reaffirmed a longstanding principle of property law, holding that a property owner could erect a gate on his land, even though the gate crossed, and, “at worst,” “negligibly” burdened a neighbor’s easement. Hammond v. Lovvorn, No. 2070749 (Ala. Civ. App. Feb. 20, 2009).

Continue reading

Cases Released February 20, 2009

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

Horton v. Perkins

Williams v. Hill

Gardner v. State of Alabama

Water and Wastewater Board of the City of Madison v. City of Athens

Hammond v. Lovvorn

Whorton v. Bruce

Norandal U.S.A., Inc. v. Graben

Complete List of Decisions from the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

 

From the Alabama Supreme Court:

Ex parte Perch; Petition for Writ of Mandamus (In re: Perch v. Judge Alfred Bahakel)

Brown v. W.P. Media, Inc.

Prill v. Marrone et al.

Cook’s Pest Control, Inc. v. Rebar

Complete List of Decisions from the Alabama Supreme Court

Cases Released February 13, 2009

From the Alabama Supreme Court:

Ex parte Steele; Petition for Writ of Certiorari (In re: Steele v. State of Alabama)

Ex parte McConico; Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals (In re: McConico v. State of Alabama)

Ex parte Webb et al.; Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals (In re: Webb et al. v. City of Demopolis)

Ex parte Knight; Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals (In re: Knight v. Knight)

Complete List of Decisions From the Alabama Supreme Court

 

From the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

J.M. v. C.M.

Hayes v. Hayes

Watson v. Whittington Real Estate, LLC, et al.

Atkins v. State of Alabama

Schlarb v. Lee

Milloy v. Woods

Complete List of Decisions from the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

Negligence of Attorney Is Not Imputed to Insurance Company Which Retained Attorney to Represent Insured

In a question of first impression in Alabama, the Court in Lifestar Response of Alabama, Inc. v. Admiral Insurance Company, [Ms. 1060776] (Ala. Feb. 6, 2009), held that the negligence of an attorney hired to represent an insured is not imputed to the insurance company which retained the attorney.  Because the insurance company could not control the professional judgment of the attorney, it could not be vicariously liable for the attorney’s negligence in handling the matter.