Battles v. Atchison

Citation545 So.2d 814
PartiesGuy BATTLES v. Sara ATCHISON. Civ. 6858.
Decision Date31 May 1989
CourtAlabama Court of Civil Appeals

George M. Higginbotham, Bessemer, for appellant.

No brief for appellee.

ROBERTSON, Judge.

This began as a divorce case.

Sara Battles (Atchison), appellee, brought a divorce action alleging a common law marriage to Guy Battles (appellant). After an ore tenus hearing without benefit of a reporter, the trial court entered a final order denying the existence of a common law marriage upon which to grant a divorce. In her divorce complaint, and later in an amendment, appellee sought reimbursement for the $3,760 she spent in remodeling appellant's kitchen. She claimed the remodeling unjustly enriched appellant by increasing the value of his home at her expense. As a part of that order, appellant was ordered to pay $3,760 to appellee to reimburse her for repairs and remodeling she had done in his house. Appellant urges here that the trial court abused its discretion in that award to appellee.

Neither party questions the trial court's ruling that no common law marriage existed. Appellant contends that, because no marriage existed upon which to grant a divorce, the trial court erred in making any award to appellee.

At this juncture, we note that there was no transcript of the proceedings below, and appellant's compliance with Rule 10(d), Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure, is commendable. Appellant provided for the record a statement of evidence as he recalled it; the appellee made some objections and offered additional evidence; and there was a statement of evidence from the trial judge. The statements were fairly consistent and provided this court a concise record for review in this appeal and revealed certain pertinent facts.

Appellant and appellee had a cohabitive relationship in appellant's home from approximately September 1984 until approximately November 1985. The parties agree that they never legally married, partly because appellee was not divorced from her legal husband until January 1985. There is evidence that they discussed setting a date to marry on more than one occasion, even to the extent of appellant purchasing material to make appellee's wedding dress.

During the cohabitation, appellee chose to remodel the kitchen to her liking over appellant's strong objections. Appellant and a witness testified that the kitchen was larger and better before appellee had it changed. No dispute arises over the amount appellee claims to have spent on this project. Appellee testified that she spent her money remodeling the kitchen knowing appellant opposed it because she wanted to make a contribution. The countertop was extended to accommodate her microwave. Testimony conflicts as to whether or not appellant sent carpenters away the first time they arrived to do the work. However, all witnesses, including appellee, testified that the appellant did not want the kitchen changed, that he urged appellee not to spend her money doing it, and that he was not paying to have the kitchen changed.

We recognize here the axiom that once having assumed jurisdiction, a court of equity will settle all the equities between the parties. Creel v....

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • Allen v. Scott (In re Scott), Bankruptcy No. 05–10595–BGC–7.
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Eleventh Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • 27 Septiembre 2012
    ...the court in equity and good conscience to disallow one to be unjustly enriched at the expense of another.’ Battles v. Atchison, 545 So.2d 814, 815 (Ala.Civ.App.1989).” Avis Rent A Car Sys., Inc. v. Heilman 876 So.2d 1111, 1123 (Ala.2003). “ ‘One is unjustly enriched if his retention of a b......
  • In re Sharpe, Bankruptcy No. 03-04644-BGC-13.
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Eleventh Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • 29 Mayo 2008
    ...equity to disallow enrichment at the expense of another when in good conscience it believes that it should do so. Battles v. Atchison, 545 So.2d 814, 815 (Ala.Civ.App.1989). This proceeding is not one of those The defendant never hid its intentions. The plaintiffs have been involved in thre......
  • Allen v. Scott (In re Scott), Case No.: 05-10595-BGC-7
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Eleventh Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • 27 Septiembre 2012
    ...the court in equity and good conscience toPage 122disallow one to be unjustly enriched at the expense of another.' Battles v. Atchison, 545 So.2d 814, 815 (Ala.Civ.App.1989)."Avis Rent A Car Sys., Inc. v. Heilman 876 So.2d 1111, 1123 (Ala.2003). " 'One is unjustly enriched if his retention ......
  • Jones v. Mill
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Alabama
    • 6 Noviembre 2017
    ...the court in equity and good conscience to disallow one to be unjustly enriched at the expense of another." Battles v. Atchison, 545 So. 2d 814, 815 (Ala. Civ. App. 1989). "The essence . . . of unjust enrichment . . . is that a plaintiff can prove facts showing that defendant holds money wh......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT