Green motion in Alabama

2017Shelton appealed. "[O]riginally at common law ... actions for personal injury did not survive the death of the plaintiff." King v. National Spa & Pool Inst., Inc. , 607 So.2d 1241 , 1244 (Ala. 1992) (describing the Court's opinion in Ex parte Adams , 216 Ala. 241 , 113 So. 235 (1927) ).

2017Shelton appealed. "[O]riginally at common law ... actions for personal injury did not survive the death of the plaintiff." King v. National Spa & Pool Inst., Inc. , 607 So.2d 1241 , 1244 (Ala. 1992) (describing the Court's opinion in Ex parte Adams , 216 Ala. 241 , 113 So. 235 (1927) ).

2017In her response to Green's motion for a judgment on the pleadings, Shelton relied almost exclusively on § 13 of the Alabama Constitution and the "arbitrary and capricious" analysis embraced in Lankford , supra. Although she asserted that § 6-5-462 violates rights protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, she did not discuss the level of scrutiny to be applied pursuant to, or any authority construing or applying, the Fourteenth Amendment.

2017In her response to Green's motion for a judgment on the pleadings, Shelton relied almost exclusively on § 13 of the Alabama Constitution and the "arbitrary and capricious" analysis embraced in Lankford , supra. Although she asserted that § 6-5-462 violates rights protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, she did not discuss the level of scrutiny to be applied pursuant to, or any authority construing or applying, the Fourteenth Amendment.

2017Shelton appealed. "[O]riginally at common law ... actions for personal injury did not survive the death of the plaintiff." King v. National Spa & Pool Inst., Inc. , 607 So.2d 1241 , 1244 (Ala. 1992) (describing the Court's opinion in Ex parte Adams , 216 Ala. 241 , 113 So. 235 (1927) ).

2017Shelton appealed. "[O]riginally at common law ... actions for personal injury did not survive the death of the plaintiff." King v. National Spa & Pool Inst., Inc. , 607 So.2d 1241 , 1244 (Ala. 1992) (describing the Court's opinion in Ex parte Adams , 216 Ala. 241 , 113 So. 235 (1927) ).

2011Because the trial court erred in refusing to give the jury an instruction on combining and concurring negligence, when such a charge was appropriate, based on the testimony and argument of Dr. Green, we must reverse and remand for a new trial.” 782 So.2d at 227-29 .

2008According to Green, Flathman’s affidavit differs in no material respect from the supporting affidavits deemed to be fatally deficient in Nelms, Lewis, and Thomas, supra. Although the Court of Criminal Appeals found the affidavit sufficient, we agree with Green.

2008According to Green, Flathman's affidavit differs in no material respect from the supporting affidavits deemed to be fatally deficient in Nelms, Lewis, and Thomas, supra. Although the Court of Criminal Appeals found the affidavit sufficient, we agree with Green. *493 All three cases cited by Green involved motions to suppress evidence of controlled substances discovered in the execution of search warrants supported by affidavits lacking information sufficient to determine whether the information provided to, and by, the affiant was current.

2007Rule 54(b) provides, in pertinent part: "When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment." The Alabama Supreme Court has stated: "A Rule 54(b) certification should not be entered if the issues in the claim being certified and a claim

2007Rule 54(b) provides, in pertinent part: "When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment." The Alabama Supreme Court has stated: "A Rule 54(b) certification should not be entered if the issues in the claim being certified and a claim

2007Rule 54(b) provides, in pertinent part: "When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment." The Alabama Supreme Court has stated: "A Rule 54(b) certification should not be entered if the issues in the claim being certified and a claim

2000Marsh relies on Trull v. Long , 621 So.2d 1278 (Ala. 1993), in support of her argument that the trial court erred in granting Dr. Green's motion in limine.

2000Marsh relies on Trull v. Long, 621 So.2d 1278 (Ala.1993), in support of her argument that the trial court erred in granting Dr. Green's motion in limine.

1997Our holding in this regard is based in part on the Supreme Court’s indication in A.D.R., supra, that a juvenile who has been transferred to circuit court for trial as an adult and is then convicted in circuit court may thereafter raise a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in regard to the transfer hearing on appeal of his or her conviction.