Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Altapointe Health Systems, Inc. v. Mobile County Probate Court

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided September 20, 2013No. 1111199Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBolin, Justice

(concurring in part and dissenting in part as to the rationale and concurring in the result).

The probate judge in this case entered an order denying the petition for expert-*1008witness fees filed by AltaPointe Health Systems, Inc. (“AHS”), under § 22-52-14, Ala.Code 1975, based on his findings that the fees were “improper” and not “allowable” under the statute. Specifically, the probate court determined that “AHS is not actually incurring the fees for which it is seeking payment,” because “AHS is not employing outside experts and thus is not incurring any expert fees or expenses.” The probate…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ex Parte Weaver WeaverSupreme Court of Alabama · 2003
  2. Lanier v. Moore-Handley, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1991
  3. Commercial Standard Insurance v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1961
  4. Ex Parte StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API