Ex Parte Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co.
Cases that cite this one
6 later published cases cite this decision.
- Haynes v. Williams (Ala. 2010)
- Ex Parte Alfa Mut. General Ins. Co. (Ala. 1996)
- Continental Grain Co. v. Smallwood (Ala. Civ. App. 1995)
- Smith v. Smith (Ala. Civ. App. 1994)
- Ex Parte Johnson Land Co., Inc. (Ala. 1990)
- Bugg v. Sofran Co. (Ala. Civ. App. 1989)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
This is a mandamus proceeding challenging the authority of a trial court to set aside a summary judgment more than ninety (90) days after the filing of an application for rehearing (filed within 30 days of the summary judgment). Stated differently, does the ninety (90) days limitation of ARCP rule 59.1 apply to an application for rehearing of the granting of a summary judgment so as to deny the trial court the jurisdiction to rule on the motion?
Post trial motions filed within 30 days of the judgment have generally been held to be ARCP rule 59 motions subject to time limitation of rule 59.1. Holt v. First National Bank of Mobile,
The petition for mandamus is granted unless the trial court within 14 days vacates its order of July 1, 1981, which set aside the summary judgment order of March 5, 1981.
MANDAMUS GRANTED CONDITIONALLY.
All Judges concur.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.