Legal Opinion · Dissent

Alabama Mutual Insurance Corp. v. City of Vernon

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 11, 2013No. 1110738PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1DissentMoore, Chief Justice

I respectfully dissent because I believe the circuit court has subject-matter jurisdiction to hear a claim that an exclusion in an insurance policy violates State law and this Court’s jurisprudence. Although the complaint initially filed by the City of Vernon (“Vernon”), the original class representative, coincides peripherally with portions of the complaint quoted in Ex parte Cincinnati Insurance Co., 51 So.3d 298 (Ala.2010), overall the complaints differ. Unlike the complaint in Cincinnati, which alleged that the insurer was charging “excessive” rates, 51 So.3d at 309, Vernon’s complaint…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Rezi P. Forshey, Claimant-Appellant v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
  2. Blue Cross and Blue Shield v. HodurskiSupreme Court of Alabama · 2004
  3. Empire Life Insurance Company of America v. Valdak CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
  4. McCollum v. Birmingham Post Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1953
  5. Peacock v. Cincinnati Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2010

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Alabama Mutual Insurance Corp. v. City of VernonSupreme Court of Alabama · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API