green
Positive treatment
Doctrinal family: Philpot v. State ↗
Issue: ore tenus ruleAL ↗
Issue: merger clauseAL ↗
Issue: liquidated damages clauseAL ↗
77.6 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2002 ·
…employee based on the following testimony by the nurse:
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Austin Brook and Austin Park Property Owners Association, Inc. v. William E. Nabors and Sandra R. Nabors
Corp. v. White, 10 So. 3d 990, 991 (Ala. 2008). " ' " 'The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.' " ' " 10 So. 3d at 991 -92 (quoting Retail Developers of Alabama, LLC v. East Gadsden Golf Club, Inc., 985 So. 2d 924, 929 (Ala. 2007), quoting in turn Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985)).' "Lawson v. Harris Culinary Enters., LLC, 83 So. 3d 483, 491 (Ala. 2011).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ashlyn Savanna Farris v. Daniel Wayne Farris
"As to questions of fact, 8 CL-2025-0456 " ' "[w]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust." Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002). " 'The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.' " Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005) (quoting Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Christopher C. Creekmore v. Ginger A. Creekmore
Standard of Review " '[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.' Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002). ' "The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment." ' Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005) (quoting Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985))." Fadalla v. Fadal…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ryan Hess v. Will Pecue
"The presumption of correctness [afforded under the ore tenus standard of review] ... is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment." Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dr. Tracy Smitherman, in her official capacity as Superintendent of the Alabama Department of Youth Services School District; and Robert Duke, Crissy Griffin, Gayla Caddell, and William McDowell, in their official capacities as members of the Alabama Department of Youth Services School District Education Committee v. Derrick Roberts
Standard of Review " ' " ' " [W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust." ' " Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So. 2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So. 2d 429, 433 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 7 SC-2025-0500 2002)). " 'The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence prese…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
K.K. v. J.K.
Standard of Review Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, appellate review is governed by the following principles: " ' " ' " ' "[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust." ' " Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So. 2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So. 2d 429, 433 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). " 'The presumption of…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Susan Nixon Bailey v. David Keith Nixon
Standard of Review " '[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.' Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002). ' "The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment." ' Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005) (quoting Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985)). 'Additionally, th…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Michael W. Dendy and Dendy Investment Group, LLC v. James Ryan, Jim Durbin, Eric Newman, Todd Carroll, Gail Kappler, and The Architectural Committee of the River Pointe Subdivision
Corp. v. White, 10 So. 3d 990, 991 (Ala. 2008). " ' " 'The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.' " ' " 10 So. 3d at 991 -92 (quoting Retail Developers of Alabama, LLC v. East Gadsden Golf Club, Inc., 985 So. 2d 924, 929 (Ala. 2007), quoting in turn Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985)).' "Lawson v. Harris Culinary Enters., LLC, 83 So. 3d 483, 491 (Ala. 2011)." Merchants Bank v. Head, 161 So. …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
J.D.S. v. S.G.S.
Standard of Review " ' " ' "[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust." ' " Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So. 2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So. 2d 429, 433 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). " 'The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the tria…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rodney G. Englund, Dyann K. Englund, and Georgetown Contractors, LLC v. Dauphin Island Property Owners Association
Corp. v. White, 10 So. 3d 990, 991 (Ala. 2008). " ' " 'The presumption of correctness, however, is 27 SC-2024-0414; SC-2024-0437 rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.' " ' " 10 So. 3d at 991 -92 (quoting Retail Developers of Alabama, LLC v. East Gadsden Golf Club, Inc., 985 So. 2d 924, 929 (Ala. 2007), quoting in turn Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985)).' "Lawson v. Harris Culinary Enters., LLC, 83 So. 3d 483, 491 (Ala. 2011).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dauphin Island Property Owners Association v. Rodney G. Englund, Dyann K. Englund, and Georgetown Contractors, LLC
Corp. v. White, 10 So. 3d 990, 991 (Ala. 2008). " ' " 'The presumption of correctness, however, is 27 SC-2024-0414; SC-2024-0437 rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.' " ' " 10 So. 3d at 991 -92 (quoting Retail Developers of Alabama, LLC v. East Gadsden Golf Club, Inc., 985 So. 2d 924, 929 (Ala. 2007), quoting in turn Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985)).' "Lawson v. Harris Culinary Enters., LLC, 83 So. 3d 483, 491 (Ala. 2011).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Larry Shearry v. Christy Spivey, as personal representative of the Estate of Charlotte Shearry (Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court: DR-18-901240).
Standard of Review " ' " ' [W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust . ' " ' Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So. 2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So. 2d 429, 433 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). ' "The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the tri…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
David DeJean, Sr. v. Pamela DeJean (Appeal from Baldwin Circuit Court: DR-22-900781).
As to questions of fact, " '[w]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.' Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002). ' "The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment." ' Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005) (quoting Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985))." 2The Octob…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
P.T.S. III v. S.S. (Appeal from Lee Circuit Court: CV-23-23).
Standard of Review " 'Because the [trial] court received evidence ore tenus, [appellate] review is governed by the following principles: 8 CL-2023-0673 " ' " ' " '[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.' " ' Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So. 2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So. 2d 429, 433 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). '…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Kim J. Washington, Katrina J. Williams v. Elrick Earl Johnson (Appeal from Baldwin Circuit Court: CV-22-900835).
Standard of Review "Because the circuit court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: " ' " ' "[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment 12 SC-2023-0464 is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust." ' " Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So. 2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So. 2d 429, 433 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So. 2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). " 'The presu…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
St. John Life Center v. State of Alabama
However, the Life Center later filed a motion to dismiss that appeal, which was granted. 13 SC-2022-0511; SC-2022-0512; SC-2022-0514; SC-2022-0745; SC-2022- 0746; SC-2022-0747 may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.' " Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Ala. 2005) (quoting Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So. 2d 77, 79 (Ala. 1985)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Reneman v. Reneman
The standard of review in this matter is as follows. “““[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly, unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 , (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there- is insu…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Lyles v. Lyles
IL The wife next argues that the trial court’s division of property and its award of alimony are inequitable. “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002). ‘“The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.’” Waltman v. Rowel…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Henderson v. Henderson
Standard of Review Because the evidence in this case was presented ore tenus, our standard of review is as follows: “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctnes…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. 825 Electronic Gambling Devices
Standard of Review “When a judge tries a case without a jury, we apply the following standard of review: “<“[W]hen a trial court hears ore terns testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or mani festly. unjust.” Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002). “ ‘The presumption of correctness, however,- is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient, evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.’” Waltman v. Rowell, 913 S…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hamaker v. Seales
Standard of Review ‘““‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed- unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala. 2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Petrina v. Petrina
On July 21, 2015, the husband filed a timely notice of appeal. 2 The husband seeks our review of the property-settlement provision in the divorce judgment; specifically he seeks review of whether the circuit court erred by considering the husband’s citizenship status, by taking judicial notice of information gleaned from the September 2012 publication of the Migration Policy Institute (“the publication”) referenced in the divorce judgment, by failing to enforce the terms of the prenuptial agreement, and by failing to require the wife to refinance the marital residence in her name only. �…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. $223,405.86
Standard of Review When a judge tries a case without a jury, we apply the following standard of review: “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002). ‘“The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.” ’ Wattman v. Rowell, 913 So.2d 10…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Massey Asphalt Paving, Inc. v. Lee Land Development, Inc.
Massey appealed from the judgment, arguing that the trial court erred in determining that Massey did not hold a material-man’s lien on the properties. 1 Standard of Review “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on dis puted facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Sullivan v. Sullivan
The husband also argues that the trial court’s division of property and its award of alimony were inequitable. “‘“[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.” Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002). “ ‘The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.’” Wattman v. Rowell, 91…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Shankles v. Moore
Standard of Review “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct'and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘ “The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented t…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ross v. West Wind Condominium Ass'n
Our supreme court transferred the appeal to this court pursuant to § 12-2-7(6), Ala.Code 1975. 2 Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “ ‘ “ ‘[Wjhen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn P…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Zarr v. Zarr
Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “““[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed.unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctness, however, is …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Namati v. Lowhorn
Standard of Review “ ‘ “ ‘[Wjhen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is-palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks , 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hill v. Hill
Standard of Review Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Phil pot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘“The presumption of corr…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Shepherd
This Court has described the standard of review it generally applies to a judgment entered following a bench trial as follows: “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002). ‘ “The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.” ’ Waltman …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dorsett v. Singla
Standard of Review “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Setver Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). “‘The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented t…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Johnson v. City of Mobile
Because the evidence in this Case was presented ore tenüs, our standard of review for this issue is as follows: “‘“‘[W]hen a trial court hears .ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctness, howev…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bonedaddy's of Lee Branch, LLC v. City of Birmingham
Standard of Review “ ‘Because the trial court heard ore tenus evidence during the bench trial, the ore tenus standard of review applies.’ Kennedy v. Boles Invs., Inc., 53 So.3d 60, 67 (Ala.2010). “ ““ “[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.” ’ ” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in tur…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Chamblee v. Duncan
Standard of Review ' “' “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly " unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Phil pot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to th…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Yarbrough v. Yarbrough
Because the evidence in this case was presented ore tenus, our standard of review is as follows: “ ‘“ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the' judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctness, however, is rebutta…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Moultrie v. Wall
Standard of Review “Because the trial court heard ore tenus evidence during the bench trial, the ore tenus standard of review applies.” Kennedy v. Boles Invs., Inc., 53 So.3d 60, 67 (Ala.2010). “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpo…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hartin v. Hartin
Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Phil-pot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala. 2002)). ‘“The presumption of correctness, howe…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Smith v. Cahill
However, the ore tenus presumption of correctness “““is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.’” Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So.2d 1083, 1086 (Ala.2005) (quoting Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So.2d 77, 79 (Ala.1985)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Alabama Department of Labor v. Wiggins
In its brief on appeal the department contends that the trial court erred by awarding Wiggins an additional 22 weeks of unemployment-compensation benefits when it was undisputed that he had filed only 4 weekly certifications during the eligible benefit year. “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Edward S. Ferguson V v. Katina Helen Hawe Critopoulos
Standard of Review Because the probate court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘“The presumption o…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Merchants Bank v. Head
Corp. v. White, 10 So.3d 990, 991 (Ala.2008). ‘ “ ‘ “The presumption of correctness, however, is re-buttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.” ”” 10 So.3d at 991 -92 (quoting Retail Developers of Alabama, LLC v. East Gadsden Golf Club, Inc., 985 So.2d 924, 929 (Ala.2007), quoting in turn Waltman v. Rowell, 913 So.2d 1083, 1086 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So.2d 77, 79 (Ala.1985)).” Lawson v. Harris Culinary Enters., LLC, 83 So.3d 483, 491 (Ala.2011).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dungan v. Early
Because the trial judge received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘ “The presumption of correctness, however, i…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Jones v. Jones
Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘ “The presumption of correctness, howev…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Smith v. Cahill
Standard of Review Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). ‘ “The presumption of…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Clemons v. Howard
Thereafter, Clemons timely appealed, and the supreme court transferred the appeal to this court pursuant to § 12-2-7(6), Ala. Code 1975. 6 Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “““[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpá- bly erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks , 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dorough v. Ricks
Corp. v. White, 10 So.3d 990, 991 (Ala.2008). ‘ “ ‘ “The presumption of correctness, however, is re-buttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment.” ”” 10 So.3d at 991 -92 (quoting Retail Developers of Alabama, LLC v. East Gadsden Golf Club, Inc., 985 So.2d 924, 929 (Ala.2007), quoting in turn Wattman v. Rowell, 913 So.2d 1083,1086 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Dennis v. Dobbs, 474 So.2d 77, 79 (Ala.1985)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Blasdel v. Blasdel
Standard of Review “ ““ “[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.”’” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). “ ‘The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to t…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
E.A.B. v. D.G.W.
Because the trial court received evidence ore tenus, our review is governed by the following principles: “ ‘ “ ‘[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.’ ” ’ Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in ton Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125 (Ala.2002)). “‘The presumption of correctness, however…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Frazier v. Curry
Standard of Review “This court’s standard of reviewing a division of property pursuant to a judgment of divorce following ore tenus proceedings is well settled: “““ “[W]hen a trial court hears ore tenus testimony, its findings on disputed facts are presumed correct and its judgment based on those findings will not be reversed unless the judgment is palpably erroneous or manifestly unjust.” ’ ” Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. v. Parks, 977 So.2d 440, 443 (Ala.2007) (quoting Fadalla v. Fadalla, 929 So.2d 429, 433 (Ala.2005), quoting in turn Philpot v. State, 843 So.2d 122, 125…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Dr. Arthur Dennis, Etc.
v.
Jo Ann Dobbs.
v.
Jo Ann Dobbs.
83-1239.
Supreme Court of Alabama.
Jun 28, 1985.
Edward Cunningham, Gadsden, for appellants. Larry H. Keener of Floyd, Keener Cusimano, Gadsden, for appellee.
Embry.
Cited by 126 opinions | Published
This is an appeal from a writ of mandamus issued by the trial court ordering Dr. Arthur Dennis, as President of Gadsden State Junior College, to reinstate Jo Ann Dobbs as student health nurse at the school, with back pay and benefits. We affirm.
Jo Ann Dobbs had been a school health nurse at Gadsden State Junior College ("Gadsden State") since 1972. Mrs. Dobbs's contract with the school was to expire on 30 September 1983. The State Board of Education Policy 614.011 states:
"All personnel (except instructors, librarians or counselors) not on continuing service status employed on a full-time basis shall be notified in writing of nonrenewal of employment on or before 120 calendar days preceding the expiration of the contract and . . . failure of the employing agent to notify employee of nonrenewal presumes employment for the next contract period."
2 June 1983 was the last day Dobbs could have received notice within this 120-day limit.
Dr. Arthur Dennis, President of Gadsden State, sent Mrs. Dobbs a certified letter on *Page 79 2 June 1983 to inform her of the nonrenewal of her contract. This letter read, in part:
"Dear Mrs. Dobbs:
"This letter is written pursuant to State Board of Education Policy 614.011 which requires that non-professional staff be given 120 days' notice concerning contract non-renewal. It is intended to serve as the required official prior notification that your employment contract, which terminates September 30, 1983, will not be renewed.
"Sincerely, "s/Arthur W. Dennis "Arthur W. Dennis "President"
Mrs. Dobbs was not at home, however, so the post office left her a note that the letter carrier had attempted to deliver the letter. On 4 June 1983, Mrs. Dobbs called the post office and was informed that the letter was from Gadsden State. Mrs. Dobbs did not see a copy of the letter until 8 June 1983, when she saw a copy that had been sent to her husband, who was Dean of Student Services at Gadsden State. Mrs. Dobbs accepted the certified letter at the post office on 15 June 1983.
The trial court found that Mrs. Dobbs was a full-time employee and did not receive actual written notice 120 days prior to the end of her contract. The court then issued a writ of mandamus ordering Dr. Dennis, as President of Gadsden State, to reinstate Mrs. Dobbs as school nurse with back pay and benefits since 1 October 1983. We affirm.
Dennis contends that: (1) Mrs. Dobbs was not a full-time employee of Gadsden State, and therefore the 120-day notice requirement did not apply to her; and (2) Mrs. Dobbs was given constructive notice within the proper period of time.
It is the policy of this court to presume correct the findings of the trial court based upon competent evidence, when the evidence is presented ore tenus. Such findings will not be disturbed upon appeal if supported by the evidence or any reasonable inference therefrom, unless they are plainly and palpably erroneous and manifestly unjust. First Alabama Bank ofMontgomery v. Coker, 408 So.2d 510 (Ala. 1982); Knapp v. Knapp,392 So.2d 527 (Ala. 1980). The presumption of correctness, however, is rebuttable and may be overcome where there is insufficient evidence presented to the trial court to sustain its judgment. First Alabama Bank of Montgomery v. Coker, supra.
We hold that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the trial court's finding that Mrs. Dobbs was a full-time employee and thus was entitled to 120 days' notice of non-renewal of her contract under State Board of Education Policy 614.011. Mrs. Dobbs testified she worked seven hours in her office on days that school was in session, with no break for lunch. The office hours for the school nurse are listed in the school catalog as 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., or seven hours. Dobbs's job description states that in addition to these office hours, she will be "on call in case of emergencies." Mrs. Dobbs testified she was often called back nights, weekends, and days between quarters by "dorm mothers" and students. She further testified that she often stayed later than 3:00 p.m. to take care of sick or injured students and drive them to the doctor, if needed. Dobbs's job description also called for her to perform "other related duties assigned." Mrs. Dobbs testified she performed such diverse tasks as coordinating health fairs, making trips as the cheerleader sponsor, and running the hospitality room at the State Women's Basketball Tournament. All of these activities were done after her posted office hours. Mrs. Dobbs only drew seventy percent of the salary for a full-time employee, however. Mrs. Dobbs testified she considered herself a full-time employee in every respect except the way her salary was calculated. Dr. Dennis testified that Mrs. Dobbs received the same fringe benefits as a full-time employee, including sick leave, professional leave, personal leave, annual leave, insurance, and holidays. Dr. Dennis's letter to Mrs. Dobbs, in which he states the letter is written pursuant to Policy 614.011, also could lead to an inference *Page 80 that Gadsden State considered Dobbs a full-time employee.
Based on the evidence above, we cannot say that the trial court was plainly and palpably erroneous in finding that Mrs. Dobbs was a full-time employee for the purposes of Policy 614.011. As a full-time employee, Mrs. Dobbs was entitled to notice of non-renewal of her contract at least 120 days before it expired.
Dennis contends Mrs. Dobbs received constructive notice of the non-renewal of her contract, which he says should be sufficient for a non-instructor employee. The policy in question states that such employees "shall be notified in writing of non-renewal of employment." We do not believe the trial court was plainly and palpably in error in interpreting this language to mean actual notice was required. Furthermore, Code 1975, § 16-24-12, dealing with teachers is similar to Board Policy 614.011. It requires the employing Board of Education to give notice of non-renewal in writing to a teacher on or before the last day of the school term. Failure to give such notice has the effect of deeming the teacher reemployed for the succeeding school year. This court has held that written notice of non-renewal must be given to the teacher. SeeAthens City Board of Education v. Reeves, 388 So.2d 515 (Ala. 1980); Stollenwerck v. Talladega County Board of Education,420 So.2d 21 (Ala. 1982); Johnson v. Selma Board of Education,356 So.2d 649 (Ala. 1978). Although the standard of notice for teachers and non-instructors may be different, we do not have to reach this issue. Mrs. Dobbs did not have even constructive notice of the non-renewal of her contract. She testified she did not know that the letter was being sent to her. The note left by the mail carrier merely stating he had tried to deliver a certified letter does not suffice as constructive notice.
Since Mrs. Dobbs did not receive notice of the non-renewal of her employment on or before 120 days preceding the end of her contract, she was presumed employed for the next contract period. Therefore, we hold Mrs. Dobbs was entitled to reinstatement as school nurse, with back pay and benefits.
AFFIRMED.
TORBERT, C.J., and FAULKNER, ALMON and ADAMS, JJ., concur.