# Bearden v. Coker

> Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · June 22, 2012 · 121 So. 3d 359

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4804472

## Case

- **Full name:** Garry BEARDEN v. Virgil H. COKER
- **Court:** Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
- **Decided:** June 22, 2012
- **Citations:** 121 So. 3d 359; 2012 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 160; 2012 WL 2362633
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Moore
- **Judges:** Bryan, Moore, Pittman, Thomas, Thompson
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4804472

## Opinion text

MOORE, Judge,
dissenting.
Although I concurred in the substituted opinion released by this court on June 22, 2012, upon consideration of Garry Bear-den’s application for rehearing directed to that opinion I have come to the conclusion that this court should have reversed the summary judgment entered by the trial court. See Drees v. Turner, 10 So.3d 601, 603 (Ala.Civ.App.2008) (“[Ajlthough neither the parties nor the trial court had apparently been aware that the matter had been converted into a motion for a summary judgment, the failure to notify the parties that the motion had been converted was prejudicial to both parties and, there *370 fore, the case was due to be remanded.”). Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from this court’s decision to overrule Bearden’s application for rehearing.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4804472. Public record. Not legal advice.