Opinion

Palmer v. Browning

33 So. 3d 1249
2009 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 481
2009 WL 2903463

Court: Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
Filed: Sep 11, 2009
Status: Published
Author: Bryan
On the bench: Thompson, Pittman, Thomas, Moore, Bryan
Cited by: 1 cases

The opinion

BRYAN, Judge,

dissenting.

I disagree with the main opinion’s conclusion that the trial court’s December 12, 2008, order constituted a denial of Steve Palmer’s postjudgment motion, because, in my opinion, that order did not indicate an intent to adjudicate Palmer’s post-judgment motion. See Rule 58(b), Ala. R. Civ. P. Therefore, in my opinion, the appeal was timely filed, and we should reach the merits of the appeal. Consequently, I respectfully dissent.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.