Supreme Court of Alabama

The court affirmed specific performance of Vest’s purchase option and rejected Lee and Boles’s ejectment claim because the trial court reasonably found that the closing failed because of the conduct of Lee, Boles, and their closing attorney, not because Vest’s personal check derailed it.

The Court affirmed the orders striking and denying the plaintiffs’ untimely summary-judgment response, concluding that the response was due two business days before the hearing and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.

The court dismissed Phillips’s appeal because his claims directly against the State and state agencies were barred by state immunity, and his challenges to individual state actors’ decisions had to proceed through common-law certiorari rather than a declaratory-judgment action.

The Court reversed the summary judgment because it was entered before McConico received the motion and without giving him an opportunity to respond, contrary to Rule 56’s procedural safeguards.

The Court held that the circuit court used the wrong statute when assessing Officer Marquette’s pretrial immunity claim: the defense-of-persons statute, which applies to any person and provides for pretrial immunity, governs that request rather than the peace-officer use-of-force statute.

The Alabama Supreme Court granted mandamus because the circuit court left a venue-based motion to dismiss pending while requiring extensive discovery that reached the merits. It directed the circuit court to vacate that discovery order and rule on the motion as expeditiously as possible, permitting any interim…

The Court granted mandamus and held that the officer was entitled to State-agent immunity because he was patrolling when the collision occurred, an activity within the discretionary-function category for peace officers.

The Court granted the City and Planning Commission’s mandamus petition and directed summary judgment for them on 68V’s negligence damages claim. It held that the volunteer commissioners were protected by volunteer immunity, that bad-faith conduct alleged against them was barred by municipal immunity, and that the paid…

The court affirmed the finding that Envoy was liable for retaliatory discharge because the evidence, viewed favorably to Creagh, allowed the jury to find that Atkinson made the termination decision and that Envoy’s stated reason was pretextual.

The court affirmed the orders striking the plaintiffs’ summary-judgment response as untimely and denying its later resubmission, concluding that the response was due two business days before the hearing and that the plaintiffs had notice and had not sought an extension or continuance.

The Court affirmed the default judgment because COR3 did not provide specific allegations and evidence establishing a plausible, complete defense. It reversed the attorney-fee order because the fee award rested on the contingency percentage without evidence of time expended or evaluation of all 12 reasonableness…

The Court affirmed dismissal of the relators’ quo warranto action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. It held that a party nominee does not exercise a public office and therefore cannot be challenged through quo warranto, while the statutory primary-election contest process governs challenges to a nominee’s…

The Court held that the professional-services exclusion in OMS’s Nationwide policy barred coverage for Browne’s injuries, including her defective-product claims, because they arose from pharmacy compounding.

The court dismissed the appeal because the order denying the amended Rule 60(b) motion was not a final judgment. The trial court had expressly reserved unresolved issues concerning the property's legal description and the corresponding purchase price, so the proceedings had not ended and appellate jurisdiction was…

The Supreme Court of Alabama reversed a Jefferson Circuit Court order directing the complete demolition of a dilapidated nine-building apartment complex and assessing the demolition costs against the property's mortgagee, Lima One Capital, LLC.

The court dismissed Ivy's appeal because the trial court's default judgment reserved damages for later determination and was therefore interlocutory and nonfinal. The trial court's statement that Ivy's motion to compel arbitration was moot did not convert the judgment into an immediately appealable order denying…

The Supreme Court of Alabama granted the Escambia County Commission and five county commissioners a writ of mandamus directing the Escambia Circuit Court to dismiss the Floyds' claims against them.

The court held that the Jefferson Circuit Court retained subject-matter jurisdiction to consider a mandamus petition challenging an administrative order issued by the Jefferson Probate Court.

The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the Cullman Circuit Court's dismissal of pro se litigant Dalton Banks's slander action on res judicata grounds, holding that Banks waived appellate review by failing to challenge the preclusion rationale in his opening brief.

The court held that discovery-sharing provisions are not categorically prohibited by Rule 26 and may be included in a protective order when appropriately limited. It concluded that the trial court did not clearly exceed its discretion by allowing sharing in specific existing cases involving materially identical…

The Supreme Court of Alabama granted the association's petition for a writ of mandamus and directed the Greene Circuit Court to vacate its stay of the association's declaratory-judgment action, but only to the extent the association seeks a determination of its present duty to defend the Greene County Commission…

The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction against Alabama's regulation of electronic nicotine-delivery products. It held that the plaintiffs had standing because enforcement threatened concrete economic and enforcement-related injuries, but concluded that they had not shown a reasonable likelihood of…

The court granted the City's mandamus petition and directed the circuit court to enter summary judgment for the City on municipal-immunity grounds. The City made a prima facie showing that it lacked actual or constructive notice of the road defect, while Stoudmire's remaining evidence was either inadmissible…

The court granted the consolidated mandamus petitions in part and directed dismissal of the plaintiffs' claims challenging the legality of Tuskegee's automated traffic-enforcement ordinance because the plaintiffs had accepted liability or failed to invoke the ordinance's review process, and later resolutions nullified…

The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction against Alabama's regulation of electronic nicotine delivery systems. It held that the plaintiffs had standing because enforcement threatened concrete economic and legal harms, but concluded that they had not shown a reasonable likelihood of…

The court reversed an award requiring Harper to pay nearly $6.3 million in attorneys’ fees and costs. It held that the circuit court had subject-matter jurisdiction despite the timing of docketing and later certification of the probate records, but that fees could not be imposed because Harper presented sufficient…

The court held that a municipality does not owe an individual property owner a tort duty to upgrade or expand an existing stormwater-drainage system when the alleged flooding results from inadequate capacity rather than negligent design, construction, or maintenance.

The Alabama Supreme Court reversed the Madison Circuit Court’s order releasing the garnishee and remanded for the trial court to allow the plaintiff to orally examine the garnishee under Ala. Code 1975 §6-6-450, finding the garnishee’s answer substantially complied with the affidavit requirement of §6-6-451.

The court held that a general contractor's failure to possess a particular work classification when it executed a construction contract does not automatically render the contract void when the contractor held a valid general-contractor license, substantially complied with the licensing scheme, and did not attempt to…

The Supreme Court of Alabama held that the Shelby Circuit Court lacked subject‑matter jurisdiction because the original ejectment complaint named only deceased defendants, rendering the action void ab initio.

The court affirmed the summary judgment for Bonilla on his conversion, breach-of-contract, and negligence claims and affirmed the related compensatory-damages and interest awards.

The court reversed the dismissal with prejudice of the defendants' counterclaims and remanded for further proceedings. It held that an inadvertent failure to appear at a motion hearing did not establish the willful or contumacious conduct or extreme circumstances required for a Rule 41(b) dismissal, and that the…

The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the circuit court’s dismissal of Wilder’s suit, holding that he lacked standing to sue the Public Park and Recreation Board and that his claim against the City of Hoover failed to state a valid legal cause of action.

The court held that the Habitual Felony Offender Act required sentencing Spencer under its provision giving the trial court discretion to impose either life imprisonment or life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

The Supreme Court of Alabama reversed the circuit court’s July 2025 order declaring Daniel Thomas not an heir of Ernest Thomas because the court lacked subject‑matter jurisdiction to remove the estate administration without a sworn petition under Ala. Code 1975 § 12‑11‑41.

The Alabama Supreme Court reversed the denial of TAMKO’s motion to compel arbitration and remanded with instructions to grant the motion. It concluded that the warranty’s arbitration clause clearly and unmistakably delegated arbitrability to an arbitrator.

Laurie Ibach and Mark Campbell appealed a summary judgment entered for Bruce Stewart in a dispute concerning his alleged duties as trustee of two family trusts. The provided opinion text ends before the court’s analysis or disposition, so it does not reveal what the Supreme Court of Alabama decided.

The Alabama Supreme Court granted Kim McCarson’s petition for a writ of mandamus and directed the circuit court to dismiss Steve Williams’s complaint against her. The supplied opinion excerpt states that result but ends before the court’s reasoning, so the legal basis for the decision cannot be determined from the…

The court established a new rule for determining whether an unmarried biological father voluntarily forfeited his presumptive custody right: the relevant period begins when he knows or should know that he is the child's father, rather than when paternity is judicially adjudicated.

The Supreme Court of Alabama held that the trial court erred by striking a jury without first ensuring a list of at least twenty‑four competent jurors, reversing the judgment in favor of Cooper and setting aside the order appointing a receiver over Highland Rim; the case was remanded for further proceedings.