Austill v. Prescott
Decision Date | 12 July 2019 |
Docket Number | 1170730,1170709 |
Citation | Austill v. Prescott, 293 So.3d 333 (Ala. 2019) |
Parties | Jere AUSTILL III v. Tyler Montana Jul PRESCOTT Tyler Montana Jul Prescott v. Jere Austill III |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Henry J. Walker, Jr., of Walker Law Firm, Birmingham, for appellant/cross-appelleeJere Austill III.
Grant Blackburn of Blackburn & Conner, P.C., Bay Minette, for appellee/cross-appellant Tyler Montana Jul Prescott.
In case no. 1170709, Jere Austill III appeals from a judgment of the Baldwin Circuit Court("the trial court") permitting Tyler Montana Jul Prescott to redeem certain real property under §§ 40-10-82and40-10-83,Ala. Code 1975.Specifically, Austill argues that, through adverse possession, he had "cut off" Prescott's right to redeem the property.Because we conclude that, by virtue of an adverse judgment in an earlier quiet-title action, Austill is precluded by the doctrine of res judicata from claiming an interest in the property through the extinguishment of Prescott's right of redemption, we affirm the portion of the trial court's judgment that is challenged in Austill's appeal.
In case no. 1170730, Prescott cross-appeals from the trial court's denial of his motion for an award of attorney fees under the Alabama Litigation Accountability Act ("the ALAA"), § 12–19–270 et seq., Ala. Code 1975, arguing that Austill asserted his argument that he cut off Prescott's right of judicial redemption without substantial justification.We conclude that the trial court did not exceed its discretion in denying Prescott's motion, and we affirm that portion of the trial court's judgment.
As noted above, this case involves Prescott's request to redeem certain real property located in Baldwin County("the property") under §§ 40-10-82and40-10-83 and whether his right to redeem the property had been cut off.In First Properties, L.L.C. v. Bennett, 959 So. 2d 653, 654(Ala. Civ. App.2006), the Court of Civil Appeals summarized Alabama's redemption law:
."
In 2007, JSW Properties, LLC("JSW"), owned the property.JSW did not pay the ad valorem taxes associated with the property, and, in 2008, the property was sold at a tax sale to Plymouth Park Tax Services, LLC("Plymouth Park").Plymouth Park later transferred its interest in the property to Propel Financial 1, LLC ("Propel").Neither Plymouth Park nor Propel paid the required ad valorem taxes associated with the property for 2011, and in 2012 Austill purchased the property at a tax sale and obtained a certificate of purchase.See§ 40-10-19(a),Ala. Code 1975().Later that month, Austill visited the property and installed a no-trespassing sign and four stakes with survey flags at the four corners of the property.See§ 40-10-74,Ala. Code 1975().
In June 2015, the Baldwin County Probate Judge delivered a tax deed for the property to Austill.See§ 40-10-29,Ala. Code 1975().Propel later transferred its interest in the property to Prescott.Although JSW had been dissolved, its "successor in interest" also later conveyed to Prescott JSW's interest in the property via quitclaim deed.By letter dated December 19, 2015, Prescott informed Austill of his intent to redeem the property.
On December 29, 2015, Austill filed a verified complaint initiating a quiet-title action "to establish the right and title of [Austill] to [the property] and to clear up all doubts or disputes concerning the same ...."("the quiet-title action").Among others, Austill named Prescott as a defendant in the action.Austill sought a judgment declaring that he possessed "the entire and undivided fee simple interest in the [property] with no restrictions thereon."
Among other things, Austill alleged that, since the 2012 tax sale, he had been in adverse possession of the property.Austill stated: "This matter is brought pursuant to ... § 40-10-82."Section 40-10-82 provides:
(Emphasis added.)
Acting pro se, Prescott answered Austill's complaint, quoting from the first sentence of § 40-10-82 and arguing that Austill had filed his complaint "prematurely" because he had not adversely possessed the property for three years after becoming entitled to demand a tax deed.Prescott also filed a motion to dismiss Austill's complaint, which elaborated on his answer, citing as support Southside Community Development Corp. v. White, 10 So. 3d 990(Ala.2008), andMcGuire v. Rogers, 794 So. 2d 1131(Ala. Civ. App.2000).In McGuire, 794 So. 2d at 1136, the Court of Civil Appeals quoted from its decision in Ervin v. Amerigas Propane, Inc., 674 So. 2d 543, 544(Ala. Civ. App.1995), which, in turn, quoted from this Court's decision in Gulf Land Co. v. Buzzelli, 501 So. 2d 1211, 1213(Ala.1987).
In Buzzelli, this Court stated:
501 So. 2d at 1213(emphasis added).Austill filed a response to Prescott's motion to dismiss, challenging, among other things, the legal basis for Prescott's motion to dismiss and citing in support of his argument, in addition to other cases, Southside;Reese v. Robinson, 523 So. 2d 398(Ala.1988);Buzzelli;O'Connor v. Rabren, 373 So. 2d 302(Ala.1979);andMcGuire.The trial court denied Prescott's motion to dismiss.
With the assistance of counsel, Prescott later filed a "renewed motion to dismiss," pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Ala. R. Civ. P., and an accompanying "brief," arguing, among other things:
...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Poague v. Huntsville Wholesale Furniture
...Defendants' counterclaim rests on ALA. CODE § 12-19-273 (2020). Section 12-19-273 allows courts to, in their "sound discretion," award attorneys' fees to a prevailing party. See
Austill v. Prescott, 293 So. 3d 333, 350 (Ala. 2019). The Court will address this issue if and when it becomes appropriate. B. Affirmative Defenses Plaintiffs seek summary judgment on three affirmative defenses. The Court grants the motion in part and denies the motion in part. 1. Faragher... -
Whitechurch v. Mulkey
...the “same cause of action” element applies res judicata “not only to the exact legal theories advanced in the prior case, but to all legal theories and claims arising out of the same nucleus of operative facts.”
Austill v. Prescott, 293 So.3d 333, 347 (Ala. 2019)(quoting Wesch v. Folsom, 6 F.3d 1465, 1471 Cir. 1993) (cleaned up)). The state court determined it did not have jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' RICO claim and Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed it.[5] Although this was not a... -
A.C.B. v. A.B.B.
...application of the doctrine of res judicata or claim preclusion is not limited to the exact cause of action but may also include " ‘all legal theories and claims arising out of the same nucleus of operative facts.’ "
Austill v. Prescott, 293 So. 3d 333, 346 (Ala. 2019)(quoting Old Republic Ins. Co. v. Lanier, 790 So. 2d 922, 928 (Ala. 2000)). The mother contends that the aunt and the uncle could have litigated in the .03 actions issues such as whether the children’s best interests were... -
Hamilton v. Guardian Tax AL, LLC
...2008) (recognizing that, under Gulf Land, a lack of possession does not categorically bar an owner's action seeking judicial redemption under § 40-10-83 ).I previously discussed my view of § 40-10-83 in
Austill v. Prescott, 293 So. 3d 333, 362 (Ala. 2019) (Mitchell, J., concurring in the result), in which I explained that an owner of property whose possession had been cut off by a tax purchaser's adverse possession nevertheless had a right to judicially redeem the property:"[I]n...