Legal Opinion
D.R. Horton, Inc.—Birmingham v. Ferrari
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided February 6, 2015No. 1130679 and 1130726PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MURDOCK, Justice.
D.R. Horton, Inc. — Birmingham (“DR Horton”), filed a verified petition in the Baldwin Circuit Court, pursuant to Rule 27(a), Ala. R. Civ. P., requesting preaction discovery from Peter Ferrari; Peter’s wife, Kimberly Ferrari; Ferrari Capital Partners, LLC; FH Properties, LLC; P6 Holdings, LLC; and Prince 5 Holdings, LLC (collectively “the Ferrari defendants”). The trial court granted the petition. The Ferrari defendants have petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus ordering the trial court to vacate its order and to dismiss DR Horton’s Rule 27(a), Ala. R. Civ. P.,…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Ex Parte McNaughtonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1998
- Ex Parte JacksonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1993
- Francis S.L. Wang v. Paul Hsu C v. Chen Kwan Tao Li Lee and Li, a Partnership, D. Michael Clayton, Movant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
- Richard A. Ash, on Behalf of Himself, and on Behalf of Bethelehem Steel Corporation v. Stewart S. Cort, and Bethlehem Steel Corporation, NominalCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- Paul Martin and Verla Martin v. Reynolds Metals CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Agah v. BartlettSupreme Court of Alabama · 2015
- Ex parte City of MontgomerySupreme Court of Alabama · 2016