DRC, INC. v. Great American Ins. Companies
Decision Date | 19 November 2004 |
Citation | 901 So.2d 710 |
Parties | DRC, INC. v. GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANIES. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Clifford C. (Kip) Sharpe, Mobile, for appellant.
Joseph C. Sullivan, Jr., and Brian Thomas Pugh of Hamilton, Butler, Riddick, Tarlton & Sullivan, P.C., Mobile, for appellee.
DRC, Inc., appeals from an order dismissing its complaint against Great American Insurance Companies for failure to state a claim. We reverse and remand.
On August 5, 2003, DRC sued Great American and Hertz Equipment Rental Corporation ("Hertz"). DRC's complaint as last amended stated in toto:
Great American moved, pursuant to Ala. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), to dismiss the complaint for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." The trial court granted the motion and certified its order as a final judgment, pursuant to Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b). The order stated, in part: "The court hereby expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay [of] entry of this order in that [DRC's] remaining claims against [Hertz] are intertwined in [DRC's] claims against Great American." DRC appealed.
On appeal, DRC contends that the complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted, in that it both alleges breach of contract and seeks declaratory relief. Great American, however, contends that "[t]here is no justiciable controversy between DRC and Great American because," it argues, "they are in agreement on the controlling issue, that the bulldozer was taken off rental months prior to any alleged loss." Great American's brief, at 11 (emphasis added). Great American insists that "[t]he position of Hertz is irrelevant to the issue of whether a justiciable controversy exists between DRC and Great American." Id. at 12 (emphasis added). Thus, Great American contends, DRC can prove no set of facts establishing any liability on the part of Great American. We disagree with Great American.
"In considering whether a complaint is sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss, this Court must accept the allegations of the complaint as true." Creola Land Dev., Inc. v. Bentbrooke Housing, L.L.C., 828 So.2d 285, 288 (Ala.2002). "`Motions to dismiss should be granted sparingly, and a dismissal is proper only when it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the claim which would entitle the plaintiff to relief.'" Gilliland v. USCO Power Equip. Corp., 631 So.2d 938, 939 (Ala.1994) (quoting Hill v. Kraft, Inc., 496 So.2d 768, 769 (Ala.1986)).
"A controversy is justiciable where present `legal rights are thwarted or affected [so as] to warrant proceedings under the Declaratory Judgment [Act, Ala. Code 1975, §§ 6-6-220 to -232].'" Creola Land Dev., Inc., 828 So.2d at 288 (quoting Town of Warrior v. Blaylock, 275 Ala. 113, 114, 152 So.2d 661, 662 (1963)). Under the Declaratory Judgment Act, parties are not "`compelled to wait until the events giving rise to liability have occurred before having a determination of their rights and obligations.'" 828 So.2d at 288 (quoting City of Dothan v. Eighty-Four West, Inc., 738 So.2d 903, 908 (Ala.Civ.App.1999)).
Section 6-6-223 authorizes "[a]ny person... whose rights, status, or other legal relations are affected by ... a contract ... [to] have determined any question of construction or validity...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Crum v. Johns Manville, Inc.
...plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the claim which would entitle the plaintiff to relief."'" DRC, Inc. v. Great American Ins. Cos., 901 So.2d 710, 713 (Ala.2004) (quoting Gilliland v. USCO Power Equip. Corp., 631 So.2d 938, 939 (Ala.1994), quoting in turn Hill v. Kraft, Inc.,......
-
Beachcroft Properties v. City of Alabaster
... ... Cochise Enters., Inc., 144 Ariz. 375, 379, 697 P.2d 1125, 1129 ... ...
-
Hays v. Skoog
...actors. It is well-settled that Alabama law permits inconsistent, alternative, and hypothetical pleadings. DRC, Inc. v. Great Am. Ins. Cos., 901 So. 2d 710, 714 (Ala. 2004). Defendant has cited no authority that purports to abrogate this general rule in medical malpractice actions. While a ......
-
BEACHCROFT PROPERTIES v. City of Alabaster
... ... [BW] had to install two pump stations [at] great expense in order to get sewer back to this ... Wendy's of North Alabama, Inc., 857 So.2d 82, 85 (Ala.2003). We first address ... v. United Investors Life Ins. Co., 875 So.2d 1143, 1153 (Ala.2003). BW and ... ...