Green v. Southern Energy Homes, Inc.

Supreme Court of Alabama October 31, 1997

Green v. Southern Energy Homes, Inc., 708 So. 2d 587 (Ala. 1997)

1997 Ala. LEXIS 412; 1997 WL 677174

Almon, Shores, Kennedy, Cook, Butts, Hooper, Maddox, Houston, See

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The petition for the writ of mandamus is denied as to the issue of unconscionability; it is granted as to the other issues. See Ex parte Isbell, 708 So.2d 571 (Ala. 1997).

PETITION GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

ALMON, SHORES, KENNEDY, COOK, and BUTTS, JJ., concur. HOOPER, C.J., and MADDOX, HOUSTON, and SEE, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part.

Concurring in Part

HOUSTON, Justice

(concurring in part and dissenting in part).

I would deny the petition. Therefore, I concur insofar as the petition is denied and *588dissent insofar as it is granted. See the dissenting opinion in Ex parte Isbell, 708 So.2d 571, 582 (Ala. 1997) (Hooper, C.J., dissenting, joined by Maddox, Houston, and See, JJ.).

HOOPER, C.J., and MADDOX and SEE, JJ., concur.

Reference

Full Case Name: Ex Parte Daniel R. Green and Cindy Green. (Re Daniel R. Green and Cindy Green v. Southern Energy Homes, Inc.).
Status: Published