Vardaman v. Vardaman
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
1ConcurrenceMoore, Judge
I concur in the rationale of the main opinion, except as to the issue of attorney’s fees.
According to the “American rule,” “[i]n the absence of contract, statute, or recognized ground of equity, there is no inherent right to have attorney’s fees paid by opposing side.” Johnson v. Gerald, 216 Ala. 581, 582, 113 So. 447, 448 (1927). Alabama originally did not have any statute addressing attorney’s fees in divorce cases; hence, in the absence of an agreement between the parties, the courts depended on equity as the only ground for awarding attorney’s fees in divorce cases.
In Ex parte Smith, 34…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Brady v. BradySupreme Court of Alabama · 1905
- Ex parte SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Shewbart v. ShewbartCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2010
- Dees v. DeesCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1980
- Smith v. SmithCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1978
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.