Legal Opinion

Coker v. FARMERS MUT. EXCHANGE

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided January 5, 1983No. Civ. 3425PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The plaintiff sued the defendant on an open account. After a response by defendant and other proceedings a judgment was entered against the defendant. The defendant thereafter filed a rule 59, A.R.Civ.P., motion to vacate the judgment. The defendant's motion was denied by the learned and distinguished trial judge and she appeals.

The dispositive issue is whether the trial court abused its discretion in failing to vacate the judgment. We find such abuse of discretion as to require reversal and reverse and remand.

It is not necessary to set out in detail the facts surrounding this appeal. The…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Robertson Banking Co. v. EbersoleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1976
  2. Timmerman v. MartinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
  3. Sangster v. SangsterCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1979

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Lockhart v. Phenix City Inv. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1986
  2. Tatum v. KelleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1985
  3. Warner v. Pony Express Courier Corp.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1996
  4. R & G, LLC v. RCH IV-WB, LLCSupreme Court of Alabama · 2013
  5. Ex Parte OwenSupreme Court of Alabama · 2003

7 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