Stokes v. Cottrell

(concurring in case no. 1071195 and concurring in the result in case no. 1071204).

I concur in the analysis of Part I of the main opinion addressing the finality of the trial court’s ruling on the plaintiffs’ claims. As to the remaining issues raised in both cases, I would quash the writs; therefore, as to Part II, I concur in the result. I write only to address the question of jurisdiction raised in the main opinion and in some of the special writings.

In Cullman Wholesale Co. v. Simmons, 530 So.2d 727 (Ala.1988) (plurality opinion) (hereinafter “Cullman I”), the plaintiffs sought to quiet…