Vanguard Indus. Corp. v. Alabama Power Co.
| Decision Date | 27 July 1984 |
| Citation | 455 So.2d 837 |
| Parties | VANGUARD INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION v. ALABAMA POWER COMPANY. HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, A Corp. v. ALABAMA POWER COMPANY. 83-234, 83-242. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Clarence F. Rhea and Donald R. Rhea of Rhea, Boyd & Rhea, Gadsden, for appellant Vanguard Industrial Corporation.
George C. Hawkins of Hawkins & Day, Gadsden, for appellant Hartford Fire Insurance Company.
James H. Miller III of Balch, Bingham, Baker, Ward, Smith, Bowman & Thagard, Birmingham, and Inzer, Suttle, Swann & Stivender, Gadsden, for appellee.
The Facts: The jury returned a verdict in favor of Alabama Power Company against Hartford Fire Insurance Company and Vanguard Industrial Corporation as joint tortfeasors, assessing "damages at $35,000." The verdict form contained the following additional language: "Vanguard--$25,000.00[,] Hartford--$10,000.00." The trial court struck the added language as surplusage.
The Issue: Is the challenged verdict invalid as constituting an illegal apportionment of damages among joint tortfeasors? We hold that it is and reverse the trial court's ruling in striking the apportionment language from the verdict form and entering a judgment against the Defendants for $35,000.
Decision: Although this exact issue has not been previously decided in any appellate court decision in Alabama, our holding of reversal is required by Anderson v. Kemp, 279 Ala. 321, 184 So.2d 832 (1966), and City of Birmingham v. Hawkins, 196 Ala. 127, 72 So. 25 (1916).
In City of Birmingham, the jury returned a verdict against two defendants for $50 each and the trial court entered a judgment against the defendants for $100. This Court held that the trial court's action effected a substantive, and thus a prohibited, revision of the jury verdict. The Court further held that the trial court should have refused the verdict and retained the jury for further deliberation with appropriate instructions to return a proper verdict. Because this was not done, the plaintiff was faced with two options in order to avoid the proscription against apportionment among joint tortfeasors: 1) dismiss as to one defendant and proceed to execute against the other; or 2) suffer an order granting a new trial as to both defendants. Layman v. Hendrix, 1 Ala. 212 (Ala.1840).
In Anderson, the jury returned a verdict for $1,500 and added the words "$750 City Cab--$750 Kemp." Based on the plaintiff's dismissal of City Cab for its payment of $750 before trial and the trial court's instruction that the jury verdict should reflect the total amount of plaintiff's damages and then reduce that sum by the amount of City Cab's payment, the trial court entered a judgment against Kemp for $750. The Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Whisman v. Alabama Power Co.
...Culp and for APCo against Vanguard and Hartford. Vanguard and Hartford then appealed to this Court. See, Vanguard Industrial Corp. v. Alabama Power Co., 455 So.2d 837 (Ala.1984), in which this Court held that because the jury wrongfully apportioned damages, APCo had to nol-pros its judgment......
-
Lumpkin v. Cofield
...of [the] aforesaid criminal action against him." See Ex parte City of Huntsville, 456 So.2d 72 (Ala.1984); Vanguard Industrial Corp. v. Alabama Power Co., 455 So.2d 837 (Ala.1984). For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new REVERSED AND REMANDED. TO......
-
Fraser v. Reynolds
...tort-feasors is not permitted in Alabama, see, e.g., Tatum v. Schering Corp., 523 So.2d 1042 (Ala.1988), and Vanguard Industrial Corp. v. Alabama Power Co., 455 So.2d 837 (Ala.1984), the verdict would be illegal and, thus, would have to be set aside but for the fact that the record shows th......
-
Walker-Waddell Realty, Inc. v. Kresge
...our review. I First, appellants contend that reformation of the apportioned $60,000 judgment was error under Vanguard Indus. Corp. v. Alabama Power Co., 455 So.2d 837 (Ala.1984). In Vanguard, the jury returned a $35,000 verdict in favor of Alabama Power against Vanguard and Hartford Fire In......