Ex Parte Cleveland Consolidated, Inc.
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
We granted certiorari in this case to determine the effect of Rule 59.1, Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, when different versions of a post-trial motion are filed at different times. We reverse and remand to the Court of Civil Appeals,435 So.2d 1283, for further proceedings.
The facts are fully disclosed in the opinion of the court below. Petitioner argues before us that the December 18 "amendment" was in reality a new motion and that the 90-day period of Rule 59.1 1 should be applied separately for each motion, as was done in Spina v. Causey, 403 So.2d 199 (Ala. 1981). In that case, which…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- ALA. FARM BUREAU MUT. CAS. INS. CO. v. BoswellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1983
- Thompson v. KeithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1978
- Spina v. CauseySupreme Court of Alabama · 1981
- Patton v. Cleveland Consolidated, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1982
3Cited by6 opinions
- French v. Steel, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1984
- Ex Parte BodenhamerSupreme Court of Alabama · 2004
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. HaygoodCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2012
- Patton v. Cleveland Consolidated, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1983
- Ex Parte BodenhamerSupreme Court of Alabama · 2004
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.