13 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
Matthews v. Mountain Lodge Apartments, Inc.green2 sentences1984Upon the authority of the decision in the case of Matthews v. Mountain Lodge Apartments, Inc., 388 So.2d 935 (Ala.1980), the issue must be found in favor of the defendant. 1982Exculpatory clauses, however, exonerate the landlord from liability for his own future negligence, Matthews v. Mountain Lodge Apartments, Inc. , Ala., 388 So.2d 935 , 937 (1980), not for concealment of a known latent defect which subsequently causes injury. | 2 | 3 |
Tunkl v. Regents of University of Californiagreen2 sentences1989In Morgan, supra, this Court quoted a California case that set forth certain criteria to help identify the kind of agreement in which an exculpatory clause is invalid as contrary to public policy: “ ‘[1] It concerns a business of a type generally thought suitable for public regulation. [2] The party seeking exculpation is engaged in performing a service of great importance to the public, which is often a matter of practical necessity for some member of the public. [3] The party holds himself out as willing to perform this service for any member of the public who seeks it, or at least any membe 1989In Morgan, supra, this Court quoted a California case that set forth certain criteria to help identify the kind of agreement in which an exculpatory clause is invalid as contrary to public policy: “ ‘[1] It concerns a business of a type generally thought suitable for public regulation. [2] The party seeking exculpation is engaged in performing a service of great importance to the public, which is often a matter of practical necessity for some member of the public. [3] The party holds himself out as willing to perform this service for any member of the public who seeks it, or at least any membe | 1 | 3 |
Morgan v. SOUTH CENT. BELL TELEPHONE CO.green2 sentences2011Co., 466 So.2d 107, 116-18 (Ala.1985) (establishing criteria for determining whether an exculpatory clause affects the public interest and is therefore invalid). 1989In Morgan, supra, this Court quoted a California case that set forth certain criteria to help identify the kind of agreement in which an exculpatory clause is invalid as contrary to public policy: “ ‘[1] It concerns a business of a type generally thought suitable for public regulation. [2] The party seeking exculpation is engaged in performing a service of great importance to the public, which is often a matter of practical necessity for some member of the public. [3] The party holds himself out as willing to perform this service for any member of the public who seeks it, or at least any membe | 1 | 2 |
Taylor v. Leedy and Co., Inc.green2 sentences1984In his special concurrence in Taylor v. Leedy and Co. , 412 So.2d 763 , 766 (Ala. 1982), Justice Faulkner spoke to this problem: "Clearly, landlords have greater bargaining power than tenants in residential leases. 1982See, e.g., Matthews v. Mountain Lodge Apartments, Inc., supra." 412 So.2d at 763 . | 1 | 2 |
Barnes v. BIRMINGHAM INTERN. RACEWAYgreen2 sentences2011See Barnes v. Birmingham Int’l Raceway, Inc., 551 So.2d 929, 933 (Ala. 1989) (stating that the exculpatory clause in that case, although valid as to negligent conduct, was invalid as to wanton or willful conduct). 3 . 2011See Barnes v. Birmingham Int’l Raceway, Inc., 551 So.2d 929, 933 (Ala. 1989) (stating that the exculpatory clause in that case, although valid as to negligent conduct, was invalid as to wanton or willful conduct). 3 . | 1 | 1 |
College Mobile Home Park & Sales, Inc. v. Hoffmanngreen2 sentences2011In doing so, we note that making distinctions between active and passive negligence in determining whether to uphold an exculpatory clause has been criticized as “somewhat artificial and arbitrary.” College Mobile Home Park & Sales, Inc. v. Hoffmann, 72 Wis.2d 514, 520 , 241 N.W.2d 174, 177 (1976). 2011In doing so, we note that making distinctions between active and passive negligence in determining whether to uphold an exculpatory clause has been criticized as “somewhat artificial and arbitrary.” College Mobile Home Park & Sales, Inc. v. Hoffmann, 72 Wis.2d 514, 520 , 241 N.W.2d 174, 177 (1976). | 1 | 1 |
FOX ALARM CO., INC. v. Wadsworthgreen1 sentence2011“An exculpatory clause 'reliev[es] a party from liability resulting from a negligent or wrongful act.’ Black's Law Dictionary 608 *393 (8th ed.2004).” Fox Alarm Co. v. Wadsworth, 913 So.2d 1070, 1076 (Ala.2005). 2 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Armi v. Huckabee
green
2 sentences2011In Baker v. Wheeler, Lacey & Brown, Inc., 272 Ala. 101 , 128 So.2d 721 (1961), our supreme court construed Armi v. Huckabee, 266 Ala. 91 , 94 So.2d 380 (1957), as having established a rule that an exculpatory clause contained in a residential lease may shield a landlord from liability for passive negligence but not active negligence. 2011In Baker v. Wheeler, Lacey & Brown, Inc., 272 Ala. 101 , 128 So.2d 721 (1961), our supreme court construed Armi v. Huckabee, 266 Ala. 91 , 94 So.2d 380 (1957), as having established a rule that an exculpatory clause contained in a residential lease may shield a landlord from liability for passive negligence but not active negligence. | 2 | 1980–2011 |
Lloyd v. Service Corp. of Alabama
green
2 sentences1999The Wamplers rely on Lloyd v. Service Corp. of Alabama, Inc. , 453 So.2d 735 (Ala. 1984), where, after commenting on the proliferation of standardized contracts, this Court struck down an exculpatory clause in a residential lease contract as unconscionable, on the ground that it violated public policy. 1985The trial court, in its order on remand, found that “[t]he Powells knew or had the opportunity to know the contents of the original mortgage to Phenix Federal and to inquire about the terms of the mortgage before they signed it.” In Tierce, supra, I agreed with the following statement in First Southern Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n of Mobile v. Britton, 345 So.2d 300 (Ala.Civ.App.1977): “If the clause is to be used to advance the financial interest of the lender through requirement of payment of a penalty or an increase in interest rate, such purpose must be openly stated and bargained for from | 2 | 1985–1999 |
Baker v. Wheeler, Lacey & Brown, Inc.
green
2 sentences2011In Baker v. Wheeler, Lacey & Brown, Inc., 272 Ala. 101 , 128 So.2d 721 (1961), our supreme court construed Armi v. Huckabee, 266 Ala. 91 , 94 So.2d 380 (1957), as having established a rule that an exculpatory clause contained in a residential lease may shield a landlord from liability for passive negligence but not active negligence. 2011In Baker v. Wheeler, Lacey & Brown, Inc., 272 Ala. 101 , 128 So.2d 721 (1961), our supreme court construed Armi v. Huckabee, 266 Ala. 91 , 94 So.2d 380 (1957), as having established a rule that an exculpatory clause contained in a residential lease may shield a landlord from liability for passive negligence but not active negligence. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Fuentes v. Owen
green
1 sentence2011The Act broadly prohibits and makes unenforceable, in a residential-lease agreement, any provision in which the tenant “agrees to the exculpation or limitation of any liability of the landlord arising under law.” § 35-9A-163(a)(4), Ala.Code 1975; see also § 35-9A-163(b), Ala.Code 1975; Comment to § 35-9A-163, Ala.Code 1975 (indicating the need to protect an uninformed tenant who may surrender or waive rights against a landlord for damages arising from a landlord’s negligence); and Fuentes v. Owen, 310 So.2d 458 , 459 n. 1 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1975) (stating that, under a Florida statute containing | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Boyett v. Oakes
green
1 sentence1993(See Boyett v. Oakes , 518 So.2d 37 (Ala. 1987), where a jury verdict in favor of a customer was affirmed where there was testimony that the bank officer orally agreed to honor an overdraft and that the bank then failed to do so.) We also find no merit in FAB's argument that an exculpatory clause in the draft authorization releases it from any liability. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
FIRST SOUTHERN FEDERAL SAV. & LOAN v. Britton
green
1 sentence1985The trial court, in its order on remand, found that “[t]he Powells knew or had the opportunity to know the contents of the original mortgage to Phenix Federal and to inquire about the terms of the mortgage before they signed it.” In Tierce, supra, I agreed with the following statement in First Southern Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n of Mobile v. Britton, 345 So.2d 300 (Ala.Civ.App.1977): “If the clause is to be used to advance the financial interest of the lender through requirement of payment of a penalty or an increase in interest rate, such purpose must be openly stated and bargained for from | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Tierce v. APS Co.
green
1 sentence1985The trial court, in its order on remand, found that “[t]he Powells knew or had the opportunity to know the contents of the original mortgage to Phenix Federal and to inquire about the terms of the mortgage before they signed it.” In Tierce, supra, I agreed with the following statement in First Southern Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n of Mobile v. Britton, 345 So.2d 300 (Ala.Civ.App.1977): “If the clause is to be used to advance the financial interest of the lender through requirement of payment of a penalty or an increase in interest rate, such purpose must be openly stated and bargained for from | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Industrial Tile, Inc. v. Stewart
green
2 sentences1982"Furthermore, the decision of the Supreme Court in Alabama Great Southern, supra , was modified by the Supreme Court's decision in Industrial Tile, Inc. v. Stewart , 388 So.2d 171 (Ala. 1980). 1982"Furthermore, the decision of the Supreme Court in Alabama Great Southern, supra, was modified by the Supreme Court's decision in Industrial Tile, Inc. v. Stewart, 388 So.2d 171 (Ala.1980). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
McCutcheon v. United Homes Corp.
green
2 sentences1982Id. 1982Id. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
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.