Opinion

Higgins v. Higgins

  • 952 So. 2d 1144
  • 2006 WL 1529698
Court
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
Filed
Jun 2, 2006
Status
Published
Author
Murdock
On the bench
Bryan, Crawley, Murdock
Cited by
14 cases

The opinion

It is with much reluctance that I concur in the result reached by the main opinion. It is my hope that our Supreme Court will take the opportunity, if one is presented to it, either to address anew the adequacy under Rule 59.1, Ala. R. Civ. P., of extension language of the nature utilized by the trial court in this case or at least to address the correctness of this court's conclusion today that the specific language used by the trial court in this case was inadequate to satisfy the requirements for extending the 90-day period for ruling on postjudgment motions under that rule. *Page 1149

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.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.