Glaze v. Glaze
| Decision Date | 26 June 1985 |
| Parties | Edna Sue GLAZE v. James Ray GLAZE. Civ. 4707. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Stephen K. Simpson of Smith, Cruse & Law, Montgomery, for appellant.
J. Cliff Heard, Montgomery, for appellee.
This is a divorce case.
During the trial the husband introduced into evidence a written compromise proposal, which was in the form of a property and marital settlement agreement. His attorney had previously submitted that proposal to the wife's attorney, and it had never been accepted by the wife. That proposal would have settled all disputed issues in the case. When the offer was made by the husband to introduce that compromise proposal as an exhibit, the following occurred:
There is no doubt that exhibit six was an offer of settlement. Apparently, the husband's attorney introduced it into evidence to indicate that his client had made a good faith offer to settle, but such was not an issue in the case. An additional reason for the exhibit was to indicate to the trial court what the husband's wishes and desires were as to the major issues in the litigation.
"An offer of compromise by one party to the other in a civil action, whether before or after the litigation is begun, is inadmissible." C. Gamble, McElroy's Alabama Evidence § 188.01(1) (3d ed. 1977). That rule is founded upon grounds of public policy. S. Gard, Jones on Evidence § 13:51 (6th ed. 1958).
We have not been cited to any Alabama authority that would permit the introduction of such a settlement proposal. A divorce case is a civil action. There is no domestic relations exception to that general rule of evidence, and we will not attempt to here create one because of the undesirable consequences that would result if self-serving...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ala. River Grp., Inc. v. Conecuh Timber, Inc.
...by one party to another in a civil action, whether before or after the litigation is begun, [are] inadmissible. Glaze v. Glaze, 477 So.2d 435 (Ala. Civ. App. 1985). Alabama courts also recognize that conversations in connection with settlement negotiations are inadmissible. Chandler v. Owen......
-
Super Valu Stores, Inc. v. Peterson
...compromise by one party to another in a civil action, whether before or after the litigation is begun, is inadmissible. Glaze v. Glaze, 477 So.2d 435 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). Alabama courts also recognize that conversations in connection with settlement negotiations are inadmissible. Chandler v.......
-
Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Goodin
...or after the litigation is begun, are inadmissible. Super Valu Stores, Inc. v. Peterson, 506 So.2d 317 (Ala.1987); Glaze v. Glaze, 477 So.2d 435 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). This rule eliminates the danger that offers of compromise, if admitted, might imply the strength of one party's case or the we......
-
Ocean Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Abeta Travel Service, Inc.
...held that offers of compromise are not admissible as evidence of a party's good faith attempt to settle a dispute. Glaze v. Glaze, 477 So.2d 435, 436 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). OCL's third argument is that Abeta, not being the party making the offer, could not enjoy the "privilege" of having the o......
-
Textbook Law v. the Law of Practice: Counterfeit Rules of Evidence
...with Ala. R. Evid. 404(b). Ex parte Lawrence, 776 So. 2d 50, 53 (Ala. 2000).3. See Ala. R. Evid. 1101(a) advisory committee's notes.4. 477 So. 2d 435, 436 (Ala. Civ. App. 1985).5. Ala. R. Evid. 801.6. Ala. R. Evid. 105; see 1 McElroy's S 6.05 (6th ed. 2009).7. Blacks Law Dictionary 1099 (6t......