The Supreme Court answered the question of first impression of whether a claim for the double- compensation penalty of Ala. Code 25-5-8(e) is subject to the time restrictions of Rule 59. The Court held that, because it is a penalty distinct from the underlying judgment, it is not. Therefore, a request for the double-compensation penalty made more than 30 days after the entry of judgment is timely. Ex parte Ruggs, [Ms. 1061379] (Ala. Aug. 22, 2008).
The circuit court lost jurisdiction once it denied an employer’s post-judgment motions under Rules 59 and 60. That denial triggered the 42 days in which the employer had to appeal. The circuit court had no power to reopen, reconsider, and again rule on the employer’s motions. An appeal taken 42 days after that second attempted ruling was dismissed as untimely. Attalla Health Care, Inc. v. Kimble, No. 2061007 (Ala. Civ. App. May 9, 2008).