Legal Opinion
Holland v. Eads
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided February 26, 1993No. 1910387PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON APPLICATION FOR REHEARING
The opinion of September 4, 1992, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Joe and Marcia Holland, Lester Crowder, and John E. Sweat, Jr. (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Holland"), filed a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 24(a), A.R.Civ.P., for the purpose of unsealing the record in a prior case in the Etowah Circuit Court, Eads v. Sutherlin Toyota, Inc. (CV-88-021) (hereinafter referred to as "Eads"). The trial court denied the motion.
The Eads case was tried before a jury for six days in October 1989, after which the jury returned a…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- Greg Rushford, the Washington Post Company, Intervenor v. The New Yorker Magazine, Inc., and William Shawn Reneta AdlerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
- In Re the Knoxville News-Sentinel Company, Inc., (83-5095). In Re Knoxville Journal Corporation and Tennessee Newspapers, Inc., (83-5096)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- Public Citizen v. Liggett Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Gewin v. TCF Asset Management Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1995
- Arkansas Best Corp. v. General Electric Capital Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
- Duck Head Apparel Co., Inc. v. HootsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1995
- Riley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2013
- In Re Estate of CampbellHawaii Supreme Court · 2005
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.