Coastal Realty and Mortg., Inc. v. First Alabama Bank, N.A.
| Decision Date | 14 July 1982 |
| Citation | 424 So.2d 1315 |
| Parties | COASTAL REALTY AND MORTGAGE, INC., and Richard H. Hinton v. FIRST ALABAMA BANK, N.A. Civ. 3205. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
George A. Tonsmeire, Jr., Mobile, for appellants.
Mary Elizabeth McFadden Rouse of McFadden, Riley & Parker, Mobile, for appellee.
Coastal Realty and Mortgage, Inc., appellant, defaulted in the repayment of a loan extended to it by First Alabama Bank, appellee. The Circuit Court of Mobile County ordered the appellant to pay $3,164.22 to appellee as reasonable attorneys' fees for the collection of the loan. Coastal appeals from the trial court's order and this court is required to affirm.
Coastal executed a promissory note in the amount of $8,500 to the bank on February 25, 1981. Coastal was to repay the note by May 26, 1981. The note specified that Coastal would "pay all costs of collecting or securing or attempting to collect or secure this note, including the reasonable attorney's fees of the Bank where an attorney is consulted."
Coastal admits, in brief, that it failed to pay the note on the date it matured. After the note became due, Coastal claims that it contacted the bank about paying the principal and interest due on the note. The bank, however, had already referred the Coastal file to the bank's attorneys so that the collection process could begin.
Coastal apparently contacted the bank's attorneys and was informed that the principal and interest equaled approximately $9,400. Furthermore, the bank's attorneys advised Coastal that attorneys' fees amounting to $3,162.59 were due pursuant to the terms of the note.
On September 17, 1981, Coastal filed a petition for declaratory judgment requesting the trial court to determine the rights and duties of the parties under the note. Specifically, Coastal asked the trial court to determine what would constitute a "reasonable attorney's fee" under the circumstances of the instant action. Coastal averred that the $3,162.59 requested by the bank's attorneys as their legal fees was not reasonable.
Along with its petition for declaratory relief, Coastal paid into the court $9,492.67, which approximately equaled the principal and interest then due to the bank on the note.
On the same day Coastal filed its petition, the bank's attorneys filed a complaint against Coastal for the principal, interest, and attorneys' fees due on the note. The record does not reveal which lawsuit was filed first nor is it relevant which lawsuit was filed first.
The trial court ordered that the bank's suit on the note and Coastal's action for declaratory relief be consolidated. The trial court further ordered that the sums previously paid into court by Coastal, $9,492.67, be disbursed to the bank. The trial court said that it would determine at a later date what would be reasonable attorneys' fees payable pursuant to the note.
Coastal then propounded certain interrogatories to the bank's attorneys. These interrogatories were apparently never answered.
On November 25, 1981, the trial court entered an order concerning the matter of attorneys' fees. The trial court began the order by stating that "[t]his cause having come on for hearing on the 24th day of November, 1981 at a pre-trial conference, after oral argument of counsel for the parties hereto, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows: ...". The court next set out the pertinent facts of Coastal's default and then determined that $3,164.22, or one-third of the principal and interest due on the note, constituted reasonable attorneys' fees. Coastal was ordered to pay that amount to the bank.
Coastal moved for a new trial, alleging that the trial court's findings were not based upon any evidence and were contrary to the law. Coastal also claimed that it had been deprived of its right to a hearing of evidence upon the question of the reasonableness of the attorneys' fees.
The motion for new trial was denied and Coastal...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Davis v. Blackstock
...child-support obligation. Pavilion Dev., L.L.C. v. JBJ P'ship, 979 So.2d 24, 39 (Ala.2007) ; Coastal Realty & Mortg., Inc. v. First Alabama Bank, N.A., 424 So.2d 1315, 1317 (Ala.Civ.App.1982).The father has failed to demonstrate error on appeal, and the August 3, 2012, judgment and the Apri......
-
Empiregas, Inc. of Ardmore v. Hardy, s. 84-1834
...by the trial court." Chestnut Hills Civic Ass'n v. Dobbins, 361 So.2d 1043, 1044 (Ala.1978); Coastal Realty & Mortg., Inc. v. First Ala. Bank, N.A., 424 So.2d 1315, 1317 (Ala.Civ.App.1982). An appellate court "cannot presume the existence of facts as to which the record is silent and make i......
-
Allison v. State
...by the trial court.' Chestnut Hills Civic Ass'n v. Dobbins, 361 So.2d 1043, 1044 (Ala.1978); Coastal Realty & Mortg., Inc. v. First Ala. Bank, N.A., 424 So.2d 1315, 1317 (Ala.Civ.App.1982). An appellate court 'cannot presume the existence of facts as to which the record is silent and make i......
-
Porter v. Porter
...on appeal that such error was in fact committed. Tucker v. Nichols, 431 So.2d 1263 (Ala.1983); Coastal Realty and Mortgage, Inc. v. First Alabama Bank, N.A., 424 So.2d 1315 (Ala.Civ.App.1982); Roberts v. Roberts, 354 So.2d 21 (Ala.Civ.App.1978). This the husband has not The husband also arg......