May v. May
Decision Date | 21 June 2019 |
Docket Number | 2180076 |
Citation | 292 So.3d 385 |
Parties | Thomas Jefferson MAY v. Terri Anita MAY |
Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Albert Jones of The Law Offices of Attorney Al Jones & Associates, P.C., Tuscaloosa, for appellant.
Jason P. Bailey, Tuscaloosa, for appellee.
Thomas Jefferson May ("the husband") appeals from a judgment of the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court ("the trial court") divorcing him from Terri Anita May ("the wife"). Both parties are represented by counsel on appeal.
For reasons to be discussed, a rendition of the facts and a presentation of the procedural history of this case are unnecessary for our decision to affirm the trial court's judgment. Rule 28(a), Ala. R. App. P., sets forth what an appellant's brief "shall contain." The rule is not merely a suggestion as to what one might wish to include in a brief. Rule 28(a) mandates that an appellant include certain specific information necessary for this court to conduct a meaningful review of the matter before us.
The "Statement of Jurisdiction" included in the husband's appellate brief states that this is an appeal from a divorce judgment, and it includes the date the divorce judgment was entered and the date the notice of appeal was filed, as required by Rule 28(a)(3)(ii). However, the statement goes on to say that the appeal is properly before this court "because the case is a personal injury/slip-n-fall negligence case, filed, and appealed within the allowable times of all statutes controlling." Clearly, that statement does not indicate the basis for this court's jurisdiction over this matter.
The entire "Statement of the Case" in the husband's brief reads:
In addition to omitting a description of the course of the proceedings and a reference to the judgment from which he appeals, the husband leaves this court to determine who in this action was the plaintiff and who was the defendant.
The "Statement of the Facts" presented in the husband's brief reads, in its entirety: The inadequacy of the statement of the facts is evident.
Rule 28(a)(8) requires the appellant to include in his or her brief "a concise statement of the standard of review applicable to each issue." As his statement of the standard of review, which, we note, contains the only authority mentioned in the brief, the husband quotes a portion of Rule 4(a)(1), Ala. R. App. P., saying:
" ‘[I]n all cases in which an appeal is permitted by law as of right to the supreme court or to a court of appeals, the notice of appeal required by Rule 3[, Ala. R. Civ. P.,] [sic] shall be filed with the clerk of the trial court within 42 days (6 weeks) of the date of the entry of the judgment or order appealed from, or within the time allowed by an extension pursuant to Rule 77(d), Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure.’ "
Rule 4(a)(1) involves when an appeal can be taken as of right and has nothing to do with standards of review.
The husband raises three issues on appeal, including (1) whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding alimony to the wife "after a tumultous [sic] marriage," (2) whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding property to the wife "after a tumultous [sic] marriage," and (3) whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding the marital residence to the wife "after a tumultous [sic] marriage."
Rule 28(a)(9) requires the appellant to include In his brief, the husband merely paraphrases the statement of the issues presented. The summary is not in paragraph form and, in fact, is nothing more than the headings under which the arguments are arranged.
The heart of any appellate brief is the argument, the requirements of which are governed by Rule 28(a)(10). It is well settled that this court will not consider issues for which no legal arguments are developed and for which no authority is offered to support the appellant's contentions.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City of Birmingham v. Jenkins
...which no legal arguments are developed and for which no authority is offered to support the appellant's contentions." May v. May, 292 So. 3d 385, 388 (Ala. Civ. App. 2019) (discussing Ala. R. App. P., Rule 28(a)(10) ). Thus, we conclude that the employer has not demonstrated that the trial ......
- Anderson v. Anderson
-
Guthrie v. Fanning
...See Walker, supra. (imposing Rule 38, Ala. R. App. P., sanctions against pro se litigant for frivolous appeal), and May v. May, 292 So. 3d 385 (Ala. Civ. App. 2019) (awarding attorney fees to wife under Rule 38, Ala. R. App. P., for husband's frivolous appeal that presented the wife and app......
- Williams v. Allen