Rule 1. Scope of rules

Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure

SCOPE OF RULES—ONE FORM OF ACTION

Rule 1.

Scope of Rules.

(a)

Scope. These rules govern procedure in the circuit courts and in

courts of full, like jurisdiction, in the district courts as provided in subparagraph

"(dc)" of each rule, in the small claims courts as provided in Rule N of the Alabama

Small Claims Rules, in probate courts so far as the application is appropriate and

except as otherwise provided by statute, and in all other courts where appeals lie

directly to the Supreme Court or the Court of Civil Appeals, in all actions of a civil

nature, including those in which the State of Alabama or a political subdivision

thereof is a party, whether cognizable as cases at law or in equity before the

adoption of these Rules of Civil Procedure, and in proceedings enumerated in Rule

81.

(b)

Effect. These rules effect an integrated procedural system vital to the

efficient functioning of the courts.

(c)

Construction. These rules shall be construed and administered to

secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action.

(dc) District court rule. Rule 1, consistent with the limitations appearing in

Rule 1(a), applies in the district courts.

[Amended 6-17-75; Amended 11-23-76, eff. 1-16-77; Amended eff.10-1-95;

Amended 12-6-2012, eff. 1-1-2013.]

Committee Comments on 1973 Adoption

These rules apply only in courts where appeals lie directly to the Supreme

Court or Court of Civil Appeals. They have no application in criminal proceedings.

Nor do they apply to certain special statutory proceedings enumerated in Rule 81

except to the extent that the rules are not inconsistent with the statutes.

;

Amended 12-6-2012, eff. 1-1-2013.]

Committee Comments on 1973 Adoption

These rules apply only in courts where appeals lie directly to the Supreme

Court or Court of Civil Appeals. They have no application in criminal proceedings.

Nor do they apply to certain special statutory proceedings enumerated in Rule 81

except to the extent that the rules are not inconsistent with the statutes.

These rules do govern procedure in the circuit courts on appeal to such

courts from inferior courts and administrative agencies, except to the extent that a

different procedure is required by statute. See Rule 81(a)(32).

It has been said that the policy of rules such as these is to disregard

technicality and form in order that the civil rights of litigants may be asserted and

tried on the merits. Mitchell v. White Consolidated, Inc., 177 F.2d 500 (7th Cir.1949),

cert. denied 339 U.S. 913, 70 S.Ct. 574, 94 L.Ed. 1339. The last sentence of this

rule, read in conjunction with Rules 8(f) and 61, states a mandate of construction

of the rules which is intended to implement that policy.

It has long been settled in this state that when the legislature adopts a

federal statute or the statute of another state, it adopts also the construction which

the courts of such jurisdiction have placed on the statute. Ex parte Huguley Water

System, 282 Ala. 633, 213 So.2d 799 (1968); Ex parte Thackston, 275 Ala. 424,

155 So.2d 526 (1963); Travis v. Hubbard, 267 Ala. 670, 104 So.2d 712 (1958);

Wooten v. Roden, 260 Ala. 606, 71 So.2d 802 (1954); Ex parte Ashton, 231 Ala.

497, 165 So. 773 (1936). These rules represent an adaptation to the Alabama

practice of rules of civil procedure already adopted for the federal courts and by

many states.

Amendment of June 17, 1975

By letter of December 22, 1972, the late Jack C. Gallalee of Mobile called

the Court’s attention to two situations wherein probate courts in Alabama had been

vested with equity jurisdiction. See, specifically, App

). These rules represent an adaptation to the Alabama

practice of rules of civil procedure already adopted for the federal courts and by

many states.

Amendment of June 17, 1975

By letter of December 22, 1972, the late Jack C. Gallalee of Mobile called

the Court’s attention to two situations wherein probate courts in Alabama had been

vested with equity jurisdiction. See, specifically, App. §§ 706-712, Code of Alabama

(Mobile County) and App. § 1049(230)-1049(235), Code of Alabama (Jefferson

County). This amendment to Rule 1 specifically calls for the application of these

rules to proceedings in a probate court exercising statutory equitable jurisdiction.

Committee Comments to October 1, 1995, Amendment to Rule 1(c)

The purpose of amending Rule 1(c) to add the words “and administered” is

to recognize the affirmative duty of the court and attorneys, as officers of the court,

to ensure that civil litigation is resolved not only fairly, but also without undue cost

and delay.

Committee Comments to the Amendment to Rule 1(a) Effective January 1,

2013

This amendment deletes the exception providing that the Rules of Civil

Procedure govern procedure in all courts as specified "except probate courts not

exercising statutory equitable jurisdiction." This exception, adopted when the Rules

took effect in 1973, is outdated and outmoded. Since 1973, the legislature has

adopted numerous statutes applying the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure in

probate courts. See, e.g., Ala. Code 1975, §§ 18-1A-70 (regarding procedure in

eminent-domain proceedings, adopted in 1985); 26-2A-33 (regarding guardianship

proceedings, adopted in 1987); and 26-10A-37 (regarding adoptions, adopted in

1990). Thus, by virtue of such statutes, the Rules of Civil Procedure frequently

apply in probate courts except when other specific statutory procedures create

exceptions. This amendment acknowledges and generalizes that fact.

Section 12-13-12, Ala

in proceedings, adopted in 1985); 26-2A-33 (regarding guardianship

proceedings, adopted in 1987); and 26-10A-37 (regarding adoptions, adopted in

1990). Thus, by virtue of such statutes, the Rules of Civil Procedure frequently

apply in probate courts except when other specific statutory procedures create

exceptions. This amendment acknowledges and generalizes that fact.

Section 12-13-12, Ala. Code 1975, states: "The provisions of this code in

reference to ... pleading and practice ... in the circuit court, so far as the same are

appropriate, ... in the absence of express provision to the contrary, are applicable

to the proceedings in the probate court." That Code provision has been in the

Alabama Code since 1852. Until the adoption of the 1975 Code, it referred to

pleading and practice provisions in the Code. However, after the adoption of the

Rules of Civil Procedure in 1973, those Code pleading and practice provisions

were not carried forward into the 1975 Code, but the provision now codified as §

12-13-12 was carried forward. This created ambiguity as to whether § 12-13-12

incorporated the Rules of Civil Procedure by reference. The Court of Civil Appeals

held that it did. In re Morrison, 388 So. 2d 1014 (Ala. Civ. App. 1980); McGallagher

v. Estate of DeGeer, 934 So. 2d 391, 399 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010); and other similar

cases. However, both In re Morrison and McGallagher, like other cases from the

Court of Civil Appeals decided after the 1975 amendment to Rule 1(a) making the

rules applicable to probate courts possessing equitable jurisdiction, ignore the fact

that the Rules were already applicable in those proceedings because those cases

originated in Mobile County, a county where the probate court was vested with

equitable jurisdiction. The references in those opinions to § 12-13-12 were

therefore unnecessary but nevertheless furthered the ambiguity between § 12-13-

12 and the general exception in Rule 1(a) of probate courts from the scope of the

Rules

the Rules were already applicable in those proceedings because those cases

originated in Mobile County, a county where the probate court was vested with

equitable jurisdiction. The references in those opinions to § 12-13-12 were

therefore unnecessary but nevertheless furthered the ambiguity between § 12-13-

12 and the general exception in Rule 1(a) of probate courts from the scope of the

Rules. Deleting this exception removes this ambiguity and effectuates the

legislative intent that the pleading and practice provisions for circuit courts will

apply in probate courts as appropriate and except where purposeful statutory

exceptions exist.

In short, as a general rule, the Rules of Civil Procedure apply in the probate

court, when such application is appropriate and except when particular statutes

provide otherwise. This amendment expressly preserves such statutory exceptions

and is not intended to override them as allowed under Ala. Const.

1901, Art. VI, § 150 (Off. Recomp.), and Ala. Code 1975, § 12-1-1.

Contemporaneous with this amendment is an amendment to Rule 58, Ala.

R. Civ. P. Probate courts are not at this time participants in the State Judicial

Information System, so the provision in Rule 58(c) regarding the entry of judgments

into the State Judicial Information System cannot apply in the probate court.

District Court Committee Comments

The subparagraph of each rule of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure

which is preceded by the designation “(dc)” states the effect of the Alabama Rules

of Civil Procedure in the District Court. The Advisory Committee on Civil Practice

and Procedure in the District Court has made a conscious effort to avoid departure

from the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure except in those instances where the

very structure of the district court system dictates some deviation. In the notes

following each of the various rules, an explanation is given for any departure from

the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure

ory Committee on Civil Practice

and Procedure in the District Court has made a conscious effort to avoid departure

from the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure except in those instances where the

very structure of the district court system dictates some deviation. In the notes

following each of the various rules, an explanation is given for any departure from

the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure. It is specifically noted that the Alabama

Small Claims Court shall be governed by the Alabama Small Claims Court Rules.

Rule N of the Alabama Small Claims Court Rules permits the applicability of the

Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, as modified for practice in the district courts,

only to the extent that the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, as modified, are not

inconsistent with any of the Alabama Small Claims Court Rules. To avoid

confusion, the decision was made by the Advisory Committee to designate the

Alabama Small Claims Court Rules alphabetically. While the need for uniformity

afforded ample justification for the presentation of the District Court Rules as a part

of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, it was the thinking of the Advisory

Committee that litigants in the Alabama Small Claims Court deserved access to a

basic set of procedural rules which could be obtained without resort to the more

complex Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure.

Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending, effective

January 1, 2013, Rule 1(a), Rule 45(b)(1), and Rule 82(d)(3), and adopting

effective January 1, 2013, Rule 58(d) and the Committee Comments to the

Amendment to Rule 1(a) Effective January 1, 2013, the Committee Comments to

the Amendment to Rule 45(b)(1) Effective January 1, 2013, the Committee

Comments to the Adoption of Rule 58(d) Effective January 1, 2013, and the

Committee Comments to the Amendment to Rule 82(d)(3) Effective January 1,

2013, are published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama

cases from ___ So. 3d.