SouthernCare, Inc. v. Cowart
Decision Date | 31 July 2009 |
Docket Number | 2071117. |
Citation | 48 So.3d 632 |
Parties | SOUTHERNCARE, INC. v. Margaret COWART. |
Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Appeal from Calhoun Circuit Court (CV-07-319); John C. Thomason, Judge.
Thomas L. Oliver II, Joseph H. Driver, and Richard E. Trewhella, Jr., of Carr Allison, Birmingham, for appellant.
Donald R. Rhea of Rhea, Boyd, Rhea & Coggin, Gadsden, for appellee.
On June 24, 2008, the Calhoun Circuit Court entered an "interim judgment" determining that Margaret Cowart's injuries had occurred within the line and scope of her employment with SouthernCare, Inc., and ordering that SouthernCare authorize Dr. James White to treat Cowart for those injuries. SouthernCare filed a motion challenging the "interim judgment" on July 23, 2008; that motion was denied by the trial court on August 4, 2008. OnAugust 8, 2008, SouthernCare filed a petition for the writ of mandamus seeking relief from the "interim judgment"; that petition was denied on August 19, 2008, without an opinion.1Ex parte SouthernCare, Inc., 30 So.3d 474 (Ala.Civ.App.2008) (table). SouthernCare then filed a timely appeal from the denial of its motion directed to the "interim judgment."
Cowart argues that SouthernCare's appeal is due to be dismissed because it is an attempt to appeal from a nonfinal judgment. Cowart relies on Presiding Judge Thompson's opinion concurring in the result in Ex parte Publix Super Markets, Inc., 963 So.2d 654, 661 (Ala.Civ.App.2007) (Thompson, P.J., concurring in the result):
We agree with Cowart that SouthernCare's appeal is due to be dismissed based on the holdings of Homes of Legend, Inc. v. O'Neal, 855 So.2d 536 (Ala.Civ.App.2003), and Sign Plex v. Tholl, 863 So.2d 1113 (Ala.Civ.App.2003).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
THOMAS, J., dissents, with writing, which MOORE, J., joins.
I respectfully dissent from the dismissal of SouthernCare's appeal. SouthernCare argues in its statement of jurisdiction that the "interim judgment" is a final judgment for purposes of appeal because Ala.Code 1975, § 25-5-81(e), provides that an aggrieved party may appeal to this court from "an order or judgment" entered by the circuit court in a workers' compensation action. This language, argues SouthernCare,is clear and unambiguous, and, it argues, § 25-5-81(e) does not require that the judgment be "final" as does Ala.Code 1975, § 12-22-2.
This argument is akin to the analysis advanced by Judge Moore in his writing concurring in the result in SCI Alabama Funeral Services, Inc. v. Hester, 984 So.2d 1207, 1211 (Ala.Civ.App.2007) (Moore, J., concurring in the result), in which I concurred. In his special writing, Judge Moore pointed out that § 25-5-81(a)(1), in his opinion, permitted "piecemeal" litigation and appeals.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ex Parte Cowabunga Inc.
...the Act, and that requires the payment of only medical benefits for that injury is not a final judgment. See SouthernCare, Inc. v. Cowart, 48 So.3d 632 (Ala.Civ.App.2009), writ quashed, Ex parte SouthernCare, Inc., 48 So.3d 635 (Ala.2010); Homes of Legend, Inc. v. O'Neal, 855 So.2d 536 (Ala......
-
Riley v. Reed Contracting Servs., Inc. (Ex parte Reed Contracting Servs., Inc.)
...review, but is instead reviewable by an appellate court only by a petition for a writ of mandamus. See SouthernCare, Inc. v. Cowart, 48 So.3d 632 (Ala.Civ.App.2009)."Belcher–Robinson Foundry, LLC v. Narr, 42 So.3d 774, 775 (Ala.Civ.App.2010). Because the trial court's October 28, 2015, orde......
-
Flexicrew Staffing, Inc. v. Champion
...appellate review, but is instead reviewable by an appellate court only by a petition for a writ of mandamus.See SouthernCare, Inc. v. Cowart, 48 So.3d 632 (Ala.Civ.App.2009). However, as Fluor Enterprises[, Inc. v. Lawshe, 16 So.3d 96, 99 (Ala.Civ.App.2009),] indicates, the rule is now emer......
-
Ex parte Monroe County Bd. of Educ.
...... remedy; and (4) the properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.' " Ex parte BOC Group, Inc., 823 So.2d 1270, 1272 (Ala.2001). " 'This Court's review of a summary judgment is de novo. ......