Oldemoppen v. Walther Builders

Decision Date19 June 1981
Citation402 So. 2d 884
PartiesLawrence OLDEMOPPEN, and Margeret F. Oldemoppen, jointly and severally v. WALTHER BUILDERS, A Corporation, and William C. Walther, individually, jointly and severally. 80-215.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Baldwin County; Harry J. Wilters, Jr., judge.

Charles C. Partin of Stone, Partin, Granade & Crosby, Bay Minette, for appellants.

No brief for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. The adequacy of damages vel non assessed by a jury verdict and judgment entered thereon is not an available ground for relief under Rule 60(b), ARCP; thus, this post-judgment remedy may not be substituted for a motion for a new trial.

AFFIRMED.

MADDOX, JONES, and SHORES, JJ., concur.

TORBERT, C. J., and BEATTY, J., concur specially.

TORBERT, Chief Justice (concurring specially).

Plaintiffs prevailed at trial, but were dissatisfied with the damages awarded. They did not file a timely motion for new trial; instead, they filed a Rule 60(b) motion alleging the inadequacy of the damages awarded. The motion was denied, and plaintiffs appealed from the judgment and from the denial of the 60(b) motion.

I concur in the view that the judgment must be affirmed because a Rule 60(b) motion cannot be substituted for a motion for new trial. Additionally, I note that where inadequacy of damages is claimed, appeal cannot be taken from the judgment. The matter must be presented to the trial court by way of a motion for new trial, which, if denied, becomes the basis for appeal. See, McGough v. Slaughter, 395 So.2d 972 (Ala.1981). Since plaintiffs did not raise the issue of inadequacy of damages in a motion for new trial, the issue is not properly before us.

BEATTY, J., concurs.

...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Sullivan v. Walther
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 19 Mayo 1989
    ...relief under Rule 60(b), ARCP; thus, this post-judgment remedy may not be substituted for a motion for new trial."Oldemoppen v. Walther Builders, 402 So.2d 884 (Ala.1981). The Oldemoppens did not amend their 1979 complaint to add the various homebuilding organizations as defendants, and the......
  • Parham v. Taylor
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 17 Julio 1981
  • Matkin v. Smith
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 2 Septiembre 1988
    ...A.R.Civ.P., motion to set aside a judgment cannot be substituted for a Rule 59, A.R.Civ.P., motion for new trial. Oldemoppen v. Walther Builders, 402 So.2d 884 (Ala.1981). Based on the facts of record before us, we hold that the trial court's order of June 30 was ineffective to set aside it......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT