Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Stokes v. Cottrell

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 9, 2010No. 1071195 and 1071204Published

1ConcurrenceMurdock, Justice

(concurring specially in case no. 1071195 and concurring specially in part and dissenting in part in case no. 1071204).

As to Part I of the main opinion, concerning the nonleased property, I fully concur. I agree with the main opinion that the trial court’s “ ‘entry of [a] final order on [its ] determinations ... regarding the Defendants,’ ” 58 So.3d at 145 (emphasis in main opinion), does not adjudicate the plaintiffs ’ interest in the land at issue and, for this reason, cannot be certified as a final judgment. As stated in the main opinion, the trial court’s judgment, based on its finding…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. United States v. CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  2. Cooper v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  3. Ex Parte SeymourSupreme Court of Alabama · 2006
  4. Woolf v. McGaughSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
  5. Atwood v. Cox, District JudgeUtah Supreme Court · 1936

43 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