# Palmer v. Browning

> Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · September 11, 2009 · 33 So. 3d 1249

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9656332

## Case

- **Full name:** Steve PALMER v. Larry G. BROWNING
- **Court:** Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
- **Decided:** September 11, 2009
- **Citations:** 33 So. 3d 1249; 2009 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 481; 2009 WL 2903463
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Bryan
- **Judges:** Thompson, Pittman, Thomas, Moore, Bryan
- **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/9656332

## Opinion text

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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9656332. Public record. Not legal advice.