The Alabama Supreme Court issued mandamus directing transfer of an accounting-firm employee and client-poaching dispute from Jefferson County to Mobile County in the interest of justice.
The Alabama Supreme Court vacated an order allowing an insurance agent to interplead a $15,114 premium refund and exit litigation that also sought much larger, independent damages.
The Alabama Supreme Court enforced a tenant’s exercised purchase option where the sellers’ closing agent failed to provide timely figures, while requiring a new closing date and continued occupancy accounting.
The Alabama Supreme Court reversed summary judgment entered five days after filing because the incarcerated plaintiff received neither Rule 56 response time nor notice that the motion was under submission.
The Alabama Supreme Court ordered a prompt venue ruling and vacated broad merits discovery imposed before decision on a motion invoking a New York forum-selection clause.
The Alabama Supreme Court directed summary judgment for a Birmingham police officer and the city, holding that State-agent immunity covered a fatal on-duty vehicle collision.
The Alabama Supreme Court held that volunteer and State-agent immunity protected planning participants, defeating a developer’s respondeat-superior negligence claim against Fairhope and its commission.
The Alabama Supreme Court upheld an airline employee’s retaliatory-discharge verdict but remanded for written Hammond/Green Oil findings supporting the refusal to remit $675,000 in damages.
The Alabama Supreme Court upheld striking a late summary-judgment response and Rule 54(b) certification, but reversed the trial court’s dismissal of claims that the partial judgment did not resolve.
The Alabama Supreme Court left a default judgment intact because the defendant offered no fact-supported meritorious defense, but reversed a contingency-based attorney-fee award lacking Peebles findings.
The Alabama Supreme Court held that a party nominee does not exercise public office and cannot be challenged through quo warranto before the general election.
The Alabama Supreme Court held that a pharmacy-services exclusion barred coverage for a compounding injury and that the insured’s failure to read the policy defeated its negligent-procurement claim.
The Supreme Court dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction. Finality depends on whether the trial court has ended the proceedings and resolved the issues before it, not merely on whether an earlier judgment was final. The order on the amended Rule 60 motion left substantive property-transfer questions pending and therefore did not put an end to the controversy.
The Alabama Supreme Court reversed. Rule 65(a)(2) allows consolidation of a preliminary-injunction hearing with a merits trial, but the parties must receive clear and timely notice so they can marshal evidence and prepare to litigate final relief. A court cannot apply a provisional-relief standard and then impose an irreversible permanent remedy without that procedural protection.
The Alabama Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. A default judgment establishing liability but reserving damages ordinarily remains interlocutory because it does not end the litigation or fully adjudicate the parties’ rights. The continuing need to determine monetary relief was not a ministerial detail; it was part of the merits still pending before the trial court.
The Supreme Court granted the petition and directed dismissal. It concluded that the plaintiffs had not alleged a present, justiciable dispute supporting the requested relief against the county defendants. Courts decide concrete controversies affecting existing legal rights; they do not issue advisory declarations or adjudicate claims that would not settle an actual legal relationship between the parties.
The Alabama Supreme Court reversed. It held that the circuit court’s statutory power of general supervision over inferior courts extends to the probate court and includes authority to issue writs needed to exercise that supervision. A local grant of concurrent equity jurisdiction changes the matters a probate court may decide, but it does not transform the probate court into a tribunal equal in institutional rank to the circuit court.
The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal because Banks did not develop a cogent appellate argument showing reversible error. The Court emphasized that an appellant must identify the challenged ruling, explain why it is wrong, and support the position with relevant authority. General disagreement and undeveloped assertions do not preserve an issue for merits review, even when the appellant is self-represented.
The Alabama Supreme Court held that Rule 26 permits limited discovery sharing, but ordered four safeguards for confidential material used in related State Farm roof-claim cases.
The Alabama Supreme Court ordered a trial court to proceed with an insurer’s duty-to-defend dispute while allowing indemnity issues to remain stayed.
The Alabama Supreme Court unanimously reversed summary judgment for a subdivision developer, holding that a general contractor holding a valid Building Construction license did not void its contract by lacking a Municipal and Utility classification at signing—reaffirming the substantial-compliance exception from McNairy v. Sugar Creek Resort and refusing to equate “mis-licensure” with “non-licensure” under the Alabama General Contractor’s Practice Act.