Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ladd v. Stockham

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 25, 2016No. 1140365 and 1140407Published

1DissentMurdock, Justice

(dissenting in case no. 1140407).

I respectfully dissent from the Court’s reversal of the trial court’s decision not to grant Margaret Stockham’s motion for costs and attorney fees.

Stockham, as personal representative of the estate of Herbert Stockham, deceased, argues three grounds upon which she says she is entitled to a reversal of part or all of the trial court’s order denying costs and fees: (1) as to the denial of costs, .Stock-ham cites Rule 54(d), Ala. R. Civ. P., and argues reversible error in the trial court’s failure to set out in its order a written explanation of the basis for its…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Liberty Nat. v. Univ. of Ala. Health Servs.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2003
  2. City of Birmingham v. City of FairfieldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1981
  3. Graddick v. First Farmers & Merchants Nat.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1984
  4. Classroomdirect. Com, LLC v. DRAPHIX, LLCSupreme Court of Alabama · 2008
  5. Regions Bank v. LowreySupreme Court of Alabama · 2012

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

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

Powered by the Exa API