Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ex Parte Rush

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 26, 1999No. 1980328Published

1Dissent

In May 1986, Allied-Bruce Terminix Companies, Inc. ("Terminix"), issued a "termite protection plan" to Steve Rush, who was, and is, married to Kim Rush. "The termite plan was issued in the name of Steve Rush only and was not issued [to and did not] contain the name of Kim Rush." Mandamus Petition, at 5. Neither of the Rushes ever signed the plan, which contained an arbitration clause.

After keeping the plan in force for the next 9-10 years, the Rushes — in separate complaints — sued Terminix, alleging that Terminix had "perpetrated various frauds" against them. The trial court granted…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ex Parte DickinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1998
  2. Peterson v. David "Spud" Bishop Contractor, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API