Alabama River Group, Inc., and George Landegger v. Conecuh Timber, Inc.

Summary

The opinion rejects the defendants’ challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the wood dealers’ misrepresentation claims, concluding that the evidence permitted the jury to find that ARG and Landegger made material, misleading statements about BCAP eligibility, subsidies, and ARG’s suspension. It also upholds the trial court’s rulings allowing alternative express- and implied-contract theories, denying a continuance, excluding character evidence and two documents, and refusing to disturb the compensatory-damages award. The court further concludes that the evidence supported submitting punitive damages to the jury and that the defendants did not establish a basis for vacating the award; the supplied text ends during the punitive-damages remittitur analysis.