Ex Parte Waldrop, 395 So. 2d 62 (Ala. 1981). · Go Syfert
Search
Ex Parte Waldrop, 395 So. 2d 62 (Ala. 1981). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
17 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: E.S.R. v. Madison County Department of Human Resources (alacivapp, 2008-03-28)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) E.S.R. v. Madison County Department of Human Resources
Ala. Civ. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
Therefore, we find that the juvenile court did not err in failing to grant the father’s Rule 60(b)(4) motion. *236 Rule 60(b) Fraud Claims As held by our supreme court, relief from a judgment may be granted “ ‘either by motion or in an independent action, in any situation in which it could have been had by one of the ancient remedies.’ ” Ex parte Waldrop, 395 So.2d 62, 63 (Ala.1981) (quoting Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 2687 (1973)).
discussed Cited "see" K.M.D. v. T.N.B.
Ala. Civ. App. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ex parte Waldrop, 395 So.2d 62, 62 (Ala. 1981) (holding that, despite the adoption of Rule 60(b), a trial court or an appellate court can, on its own motion, vacate a judgment procured by fraud as it could under common law).
cited Cited "see" Ks v. Gab
Ala. Civ. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ex parte Waldrop, 395 So.2d 62 (1981); and Harrison v. Harrison, 404 So.2d 330, 332-333 (Ala.1980).
cited Cited "see" K.S. v. G.A.B.
Ala. Civ. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ex parte Waldrop, 395 So.2d 62 (1981); and Harrison v. Harrison, 404 So.2d 330, 332-333 (Ala.1980).
cited Cited "see" Shires v. Shires
Ala. Civ. App. · 1985 · signal: see · confidence high
See Waldrop v. Waldrop, 395 So.2d 60 (Ala.Civ.App.1980), aff'd, 395 So.2d 62 (Ala.1981).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." McBrayer v. Hokes Bluff Auto Parts
Ala. Civ. App. · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence low
"The doctrine of laches is purely equitable in nature and may be invoked to deny equitable relief to one guilty of unconscionable delay in asserting a claim." Stone v. Gulf American Fire Casualty Co. , 554 So.2d 346 , 362 (Ala. 1989) (citing United States v. Olin Corp. , 606 F. Supp. 1301 , 1309 (N.D.Ala. 1985)). "[T]he doctrine of laches . . . applies to Rule 60(b) motions." Ex parte W.J. , 622 So.2d 358 , 361 (Ala. 1993); see also Ex parte Waldrop , 395 So.2d 62 (Ala. 1981).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ex Parte Byron N. Waldrop (In Re: Byron N. Waldrop
v.
Sherry C. Waldrop).
79-530.
Supreme Court of Alabama.
Jan 9, 1981.
395 So. 2d 62
T.J. Carnes of Carnes Carnes, Albertville, for appellant. Stephen R. Arnold of Durward Arnold, Birmingham, for appellee.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 16 opinions  |  Published

The decision of the Court of Civil Appeals, 395 So.2d 60, is affirmed. However, we cannot agree with statements in the opinion which seem to suggest that under no circumstances may a judgment be set aside after the expiration of three years. As we recently held in Harrison v. Harrison, [MS. October 3, 1980] (Ala. 1980), a judgment procured by fraud on the court itself may be set aside by any court, trial or appellate, on its own motion, even after three years. See, likewise, Hartigan v.Hartigan, 272 Ala. 67, 128 So.2d 725 (1961), and Crisco v.Crisco, 294 Ala. 168, 313 So.2d 529 (1975).

Rule 60 (b), ARCP, was intended to simplify and amalgamate the various procedural devices which existed prior to the adoption of the rule, both at law and in equity, to question the validity of judgments. As the comments to the rule state:

Rule 60 (b) retains the substance of all the devices [heretofore available], but destroys the artificial boundaries between them.

No ground for attacking judgments has been eliminated by this rule, and it specifically retains the right to bring an independent action for that purpose. As Wright and Miller put it in Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 2867 (1973): *Page 63

Though the rule puts an end to the niceties of the writs, it retains their substance. Relief is now available, either by motion or in an independent action, in any situation in which it could have been had by one of the ancient remedies.

It follows, therefore, that the three-year period mentioned in the rule was not intended to nor did it eliminate the equitable doctrine of laches as it has heretofore obtained in this area.

AFFIRMED.

All the Justices concur except FAULKNER, J., who would have denied the writ initially.