Gill v. Burrell
| Decision Date | 10 October 2003 |
| Citation | 876 So.2d 487 |
| Parties | Robert C. GILL v. Bob BURRELL et al. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Robert C. Gill, pro se.
William H. Pryor, Jr., atty. gen., and Ellen Leonard, asst. atty. gen., for appellee Robert Burrell.
Kelly Cain Bachuss, asst. city atty., City of Decatur, for appellees Keith Brown and Steven Campbell.
On May 3, 2002, Robert C. Gill filed a complaint in the Morgan County Circuit Court against District Attorney Bob Burrell, Police Officer Keith Brown, and Police Officer Steven Campbell, seeking the return of $2,700, plus interest, which he alleged had been taken from him during his arrests on August 1, 1990, and February 4, 1991. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint. On July 2, 2002, the circuit court entered an order dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action was barred by the statute of limitations.
Gill appealed to this court, which transferred the appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Court of Criminal Appeals determined that it lacked jurisdiction over the case and purported to transfer the case to the Supreme Court for a determination of which appellate court has jurisdiction. On August 29, 2003, our Supreme Court held that the Court of Civil Appeals has appellate jurisdiction over Gill's appeal, because, it determined, Gill's action is a civil action to recover moneys, or compensation for moneys, that allegedly were taken during two arrests and that were never entered into evidence in any criminal proceeding because Gill had pleaded guilty to the charges. Gill v. Burrell, 874 So.2d 1072 (Ala.2003). The Supreme Court further held that the Court of Criminal Appeals did not have the authority to transfer the appeal to it; therefore, the Supreme Court returned the briefs and the record on appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Supreme Court also indicated that this court, after the appeal was transferred back from the Court of Criminal Appeals, "may want first to determine whether the amount in controversy met the minimum threshold for the subject matter jurisdiction of the circuit court." 874 So.2d at 1075. On September 16, 2003, the Court of Criminal Appeals transferred the appeal back to this court.
Section 12-11-30, Ala.Code 1975, provides that the circuit court shall have jurisdiction in civil matters where the amount in controversy exceeds $10,000, exclusive of interests and costs, and that the circuit court has concurrent jurisdiction with the district...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Eufaula Marine Power & Equip., LLC v. Safety-Kleen Sys., Inc. (In re Safety-Kleen Sys., Inc.)
...a case. See, e.g., Ex parte Owens, 533 So.2d 617 (Ala.1988); Culbreth v. Watson, 903 So.2d 127 (Ala.Civ.App.2004); and Gill v. Burrell, 876 So.2d 487 (Ala.Civ.App.2003). Generally speaking, the amount in controversy for jurisdictional purposes “is determined by the amount asked for in the c......
-
Culbreth v. Watson
...limited to transferring the case to the district court; the circuit court lacked authority to dismiss the case. See Gill v. Burrell, 876 So.2d 487, 488 (Ala.Civ.App.2003). Accordingly, the circuit court's judgment dismissing this case is hereby reversed, and the cause is remanded for the ci......