15 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Darby v. Johnsongreen2 sentences2010In support of this argument, DeFriece and Durst cite the following passage from Leisure American Resorts, Inc. v. Knutilla, 547 So.2d 424, 427 (Ala.1989): "`It is a well-established principle that equity will intervene and render the Statute of Frauds defense inapplicable in a contract action "`"even though the part performance requirement is not met, when fraud operates from the beginningthat is, when the breaching party procured the land ... with no intent to perform the oral agreement admitted to have been made." "` Darby v. Johnson, 477 So.2d 322, 326-27 (Ala.1985).' "We did not, in Bruce 2010In support of this argument, DeFriece and Durst cite the following passage from Leisure American Resorts, Inc. v. Knutilla, 547 So.2d 424, 427 (Ala.1989): "`It is a well-established principle that equity will intervene and render the Statute of Frauds defense inapplicable in a contract action "`"even though the part performance requirement is not met, when fraud operates from the beginningthat is, when the breaching party procured the land ... with no intent to perform the oral agreement admitted to have been made." "` Darby v. Johnson, 477 So.2d 322, 326-27 (Ala.1985).' "We did not, in Bruce | 1 | 3 |
Leisure American Resorts, Inc. v. Knutillagreen2 sentences2010In support of this argument, DeFriece and Durst cite the following passage from Leisure American Resorts, Inc. v. Knutilla, 547 So.2d 424, 427 (Ala.1989): “ ‘It is a well-established principle that equity will intervene and render the Statute of Frauds defense inapplicable in a contract action “ ‘ “even though the part performance requirement is not met, when fraud operates from the beginning — that is, when the breaching party procured the land ... with no intent to perform the oral agreement admitted to have been made.” “ ‘Darby v. Johnson, 477 So.2d 322, 326-27 (Ala.1985).’ “We did not, in 2010In support of this argument, DeFriece and Durst cite the following passage from Leisure American Resorts, Inc. v. Knutilla, 547 So.2d 424, 427 (Ala.1989): "`It is a well-established principle that equity will intervene and render the Statute of Frauds defense inapplicable in a contract action "`"even though the part performance requirement is not met, when fraud operates from the beginningthat is, when the breaching party procured the land ... with no intent to perform the oral agreement admitted to have been made." "` Darby v. Johnson, 477 So.2d 322, 326-27 (Ala.1985).' "We did not, in Bruce | 1 | 2 |
Sims v. Lewisgreen1 sentence2015Although later cases have stated the rule, in shorthand, as “an affirmative defense that has not been pleaded may be revived if the defense appears on the face of the complaint,” Hayes v. Payne, 523 So.2d 333, 334 (Ala.1987), the authority cited in Hayes as support for such a rule, Sims v. Lewis, 374 So.2d 298, 302 (Ala.1979), which is also cited in Wallace, swpra, clearly provides that, although an affirmative defense “should be presented in a pleading to a preceding pleading, [it]' may be properly raised via the [Rule] 12(b)(6)[, Ala. R. | 1 | 1 |
Hayes v. Paynegreen1 sentence2015Although later cases have stated the rule, in shorthand, as “an affirmative defense that has not been pleaded may be revived if the defense appears on the face of the complaint,” Hayes v. Payne, 523 So.2d 333, 334 (Ala.1987), the authority cited in Hayes as support for such a rule, Sims v. Lewis, 374 So.2d 298, 302 (Ala.1979), which is also cited in Wallace, swpra, clearly provides that, although an affirmative defense “should be presented in a pleading to a preceding pleading, [it]' may be properly raised via the [Rule] 12(b)(6)[, Ala. R. | 1 | 1 |
Hughes v. Wallacegreen2 sentences2011Hughes v. Wallace, 429 So.2d 981, 983 (Ala.1983) (“Under Rule 8(c), Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, the statute of frauds is an affirmative defense which must be specially pleaded.... [F]ailure to do so constitutes a waiver of that defense.”). 2011Hughes v. Wallace, 429 So.2d 981, 983 (Ala.1983) ("Under Rule 8(c), Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, the statute of frauds is an affirmative defense which must be specially pleaded.... [F]ailure to do so constitutes a waiver of that defense."). | 1 | 1 |
Hinkle v. Cargill, Inc.green1 sentence2010Accordingly, DeFriece and Durst's argument in this regard is foreclosed by our holding in Bruce. "____________ "2 We did in Bruce expressly overrule Hinkle v. Cargill, Inc., 613 So.2d 1216, 1220 (Ala.1992), in which this Court had stated: "`[The appellee] argues that a fraud action cannot be based on the breach of an unwritten contract that is void under the Statute of Frauds. | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Ramsaygreen1 sentence2006When a party invokes estoppel to avoid a Statute of Frauds defense, that response constitutes a "`matter[ ] in avoidance,' which, like [an] affirmative defense[ ], must be proved by the proponent." Ex parte Ramsay, 829 So.2d 146, 155 (Ala.2002). | 1 | 1 |
Patterson v. First National Bank of Huntsvillegreen2 sentences2002Patterson v. First Nat'l Bank of Huntsville , 47 Ala. App. 98 , 100 , 251 So.2d 230 , 232 (1971); see Rule 8(c), Ala.R.Civ.P.; Ex parte Blue Cross Blue Shield , supra ; and Ely v. Pace , supra . 2002Patterson v. First Nat'l Bank of Huntsville , 47 Ala. App. 98 , 100 , 251 So.2d 230 , 232 (1971); see Rule 8(c), Ala.R.Civ.P.; Ex parte Blue Cross Blue Shield , supra ; and Ely v. Pace , supra . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dean v. Myers
green
2 sentences2006Estoppel Based on a Judicial Admission Relying on Dean v. Myers, 466 So.2d 952 (Ala.1985), and Campbell v. Campbell, 371 So.2d 55 (Ala.Civ.App.1979), the corporation and the LLC argue that because the decedent's surviving spouse judicially admitted that the decedent had agreed before his death to be bound by a buy-sell agreement, the estate is estopped to assert the Statute of Frauds in defense of the corporation's and the LLC's request to enforce the agreement. 1993Wilma Corporation cites Dean v. Myers , 466 So.2d 952 , 955 (Ala. 1985), in support of its equitable estoppel argument. | 2 | 1993–2006 |
Campbell v. Campbell
green
2 sentences2006Estoppel Based on a Judicial Admission Relying on Dean v. Myers, 466 So.2d 952 (Ala.1985), and Campbell v. Campbell, 371 So.2d 55 (Ala.Civ.App.1979), the corporation and the LLC argue that because the decedent's surviving spouse judicially admitted that the decedent had agreed before his death to be bound by a buy-sell agreement, the estate is estopped to assert the Statute of Frauds in defense of the corporation's and the LLC's request to enforce the agreement. 1985The Court of Civil Appeals rejected the Statute of Frauds defense, holding that where both parties orally enter into a prenuptial agreement, and both parties testify at trial to the existence and substance of the contract (conflicting only over the time the contract was made), "the purpose of the statute of frauds is completely negated." 371 So.2d at 60 . | 2 | 1985–2006 |
Durham v. Harbin
green
2 sentences1993The Statute of Frauds defense may be waived when the principal commits an affirmative act showing an intention to affirm the contract, Durham v. Harbin , 530 So.2d 208 (Ala. 1988); however, the record does not show that the City ever took such an affirmative act. 1989"Moreover, the fraud required to make this showing must be 'inherent fraud — that is, an intention not to perform operating from the inception of the transaction.' " Durham v. Harbin , 530 So.2d 208 , 212 (Ala. 1988) (quoting Darby, supra , 477 So.2d at 327 ). | 2 | 1989–1993 |
Hosea O. Weaver & Sons, Inc. v. Towner
green
2 sentences2011Towner, 663 So.2d at 896 . 2011Towner, 663 So.2d at 896 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Edwards v. Scruggs
neutral
2 sentences2006Edwards v. Scruggs , 155 Ala. 568 , 46 So. 850 (1908). 2006Edwards v. Scruggs , 155 Ala. 568 , 46 So. 850 (1908). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Jamison, Money, Farmer & Co. v. Standeffer
green
1 sentence2002I have found no Alabama case that addresses this issue, and I would wait to address this issue until it is necessary." 678 So.2d at 1069 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Thompson v. Kohl
green
2 sentences2002Thompson v. Kohl , [ 216 Ga. App. 148 ,] 453 S.E.2d 485 [(1994)]. 2002Thompson v. Kohl , [ 216 Ga. App. 148 ,] 453 S.E.2d 485 [(1994)]. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Ex Parte Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Al.
green
1 sentence2002Patterson v. First Nat'l Bank of Huntsville , 47 Ala. App. 98 , 100 , 251 So.2d 230 , 232 (1971); see Rule 8(c), Ala.R.Civ.P.; Ex parte Blue Cross Blue Shield , supra ; and Ely v. Pace , supra . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Wilma Corp. v. Fleming Foods of Alabama
green
1 sentence2000Therefore, Wilma Corporation has not made the showing of fraud inherent from the inception of the transaction that is required to estop Fleming from relying on the Statute of Frauds defense." Id. (emphasis added). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Trum v. Melvin Pierce Marine Coating, Inc.
green
2 sentences1996I would not hold that a duty created by contract would not be subject to a Statute of Frauds defense in a negligence action based upon a breach of that duty. ( Trum v. Melvin Pierce Marine Coating, Inc. , 562 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1990), did not address the issue whether a fraudulent misrepresentation regarding a contract that, under its terms, was not capable of being performed in one year was subject to the Statute of Frauds.) I do not believe that Pickard v. Turner , 592 So.2d 1016 (Ala. 1992), which involved a legal malpractice action, addressed the issue whether the Statute of Frauds is a defen 1996I would not hold that a duty created by contract would not be subject to a Statute of Frauds defense in a negligence action based upon a breach of that duty. ( Trum v. Melvin Pierce Marine Coating, Inc., 562 So.2d 235 (Ala.1990), did not address the issue whether a fraudulent misrepresentation regarding a contract that, under its terms, was not capable of being performed in one year was subject to the Statute of Frauds.) I do not believe that Pickard v. Turner, 592 So.2d 1016 (Ala.1992), which involved a legal malpractice action, addressed the issue whether the Statute of Frauds is a defense t | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Pickard v. Turner
green
2 sentences1996I would not hold that a duty created by contract would not be subject to a Statute of Frauds defense in a negligence action based upon a breach of that duty. ( Trum v. Melvin Pierce Marine Coating, Inc. , 562 So.2d 235 (Ala. 1990), did not address the issue whether a fraudulent misrepresentation regarding a contract that, under its terms, was not capable of being performed in one year was subject to the Statute of Frauds.) I do not believe that Pickard v. Turner , 592 So.2d 1016 (Ala. 1992), which involved a legal malpractice action, addressed the issue whether the Statute of Frauds is a defen 1996I would not hold that a duty created by contract would not be subject to a Statute of Frauds defense in a negligence action based upon a breach of that duty. ( Trum v. Melvin Pierce Marine Coating, Inc., 562 So.2d 235 (Ala.1990), did not address the issue whether a fraudulent misrepresentation regarding a contract that, under its terms, was not capable of being performed in one year was subject to the Statute of Frauds.) I do not believe that Pickard v. Turner, 592 So.2d 1016 (Ala.1992), which involved a legal malpractice action, addressed the issue whether the Statute of Frauds is a defense t | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Deming v. Lee
green
2 sentences1985In Deming v. Lee , 174 Ala. 410 , 56 So. 921 (1911), the plaintiff orally agreed to convey his interest in real estate to the defendants in return for the defendants' promise to convey other property plus $500 to the plaintiff. 1985In Deming v. Lee , 174 Ala. 410 , 56 So. 921 (1911), the plaintiff orally agreed to convey his interest in real estate to the defendants in return for the defendants' promise to convey other property plus $500 to the plaintiff. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.