Lawyer 1 93 web by Alabama State Bar Association

ver the years commercial malpractice insurers have come and gone from the Alabama marketplace. End the worry about prior acts coverage. Insure with AIM. We're here when you need us: Continuously! AIM: For the Difference (We're here to stay!) "A Mutual Insurance Company Organized by and for Alabama Attorneys" Anorneys Insurance Mutual oj Alabama , Inc ." 22 'n"emess CMte' Pa ,~ w"y

Su"e 340

Borm"'gMm,

"'' '1>3"", 35242-4820

Te<epnone (205) 9&().(1009 Toll Free (8001 526 路 1246 FAX (205) 9&0-\1009

' C HARTER MEMBER: NATIONA L ASSOCIATI O N O F BAR _RELATED INSURANC E COMPANIES

NOTICE OF ELECTION Notice is given herewith pursuant to the Alabama Slate Bar Rules Gowmill9 Electioll of PresideI'l-elecl and (Ammissioner.

PRESIDENT-ELECT The ALabama State Bar will elect a presidentelect in 1993 to assume the presidency of the bar in July 1994. Any candidate must be a member in good standing on March I, 1993. Petitions nominating a candidate must bear the signature of 25 members in good standing of the Alabama Stale Bar and be received by the secretary of the state bar on or before

March 1, 1993. Any candidate for this office also must submit with the nominating petition a black and white photograph and biographical data to be published in the May Alabama Lowger. Ballots will be mailed between May 15 and June 1 and must be received at stale bar headquarters by 5 p,m. on July 14, 1993.

COMMISSIONERS Bar commi5Sionel"$ will be e]e(:ted by those lawytl'$ with their principal offices in the fol lowing circuits: 8th; 10th, places no, 4, 7 and Bessemer Cut-off; 11th; 13th, place no. 1: 17th; 18th; 19th; 21st; 22nd; 23rd, place no. I; 30th: 31st: 33rd; 34th; 35th; 36th; and 40th. Additional commissioners will be elected in these circuits for each 300 members of the state bar with principal offices there in. The new commissioner positions will be determined by a census on J'otarch I. 1993 and vacancies certified by the secretary on J'oIarch 15, 1993. The terrru of any incumbent commissioners are retained,

THE AUdlA.'1A l.o\WYER

All subsequent terms will be for three years. Nominations may be made by petition bearing the signatures of five members in good standing with principal offices in the circuit in which the election will be held or by the candidate's written decla ration of candidacy, t:ither must be received by the secretary no later than 5 p.m. on the last Friday in April (April 30, 1993). Ballots will be prepared and mailed to memo bers betwÂŤn May 15 and June 1, \993. Ballots must be voted and returned by 5 p.m. on the second Tuesday in June (June 8. 1993) to state bar headquarters.

JanlW)l 1993 1 I

N BRIEF January 1993

V(lluml' Sot. Number I

---'_1"'''--''' _ I til' "'" S - 801,

__.-

ON THE COVER: k •• lorms in AW»ma ""in! 0 piclu","fU< laoo.c..pe. Photo by J~mes Gukr

lNSIDE THIS ISSUE:

~(20S1 ""'.'~

.... .........._. ......._. ......_ ......... Susan _ _ _ .. -_

Dnl'

"'"'-..........

Loovytn" DoeIO" Join Forcel ,\pln. t AllUM Btl f:dwaTd M. Gro'f/fl ....................... " ...... " .... . Report. fro", IOLT" Grant Reelpl.n ...

,..... 22

Ce~ ... OIl$, ........................... .

.......... 2.

ABA', IAllal TuhnolollY Rcsou...,. Center RJlM. wUV'!<' ~1>M'''' , .............. ,..... ......... _____ .......

.......36

Enro""l~ Arblt .... tlon -"rumenl.l In Alaba ....: A Double Slandanl Dilemma

Btl Slank!l D. BiP,um and1. Dadd Pugh

... __38

Bew• ..., ofT.... Litn. and Ihe IRS RIChl of RdcmpUOIl AJln Foree'olore Bg Gilbert p, Duk... III .. "............................ .".............. "...... ........ ,..... .46 lItport of Ihe Tuk Po...,. on SPKlaliullon By /(eilh B. N()('fM1!. ,..... ....... ,............ " ...... " ...... ,..............•,...... ...... ....... 55 COlD.pa ... tI~e Faull! A Prim" - What Happe ... Whtll the LId fllu Off Pando ..." Bo.: By Deborah AJlq Smilh ami Rh<!t!da K. Pitu ..... . ,...... 56

. . . . - -... --'-'._--, -"'-.-_.,

......... 4 . ..............5 ........ 8

80, Briof,. ............................... .10 Rtdintl tht Circu il> ... ...... .............. .. ... .10 Bu ilding AI>b.\rn;o', COUrthou ............. ,.... 12 Opinionsoltht Gt ......1Cw_1 .. "... 20 Buildi", Fund ll<H'lOr R~II.. ."... 23

AU.RA."" ST~ T~ lI.o.~ IlEAOOUARTERS STAFF

CLE Opportunitit$ ..

."...............34 Y<>unj] Lowyo,,' Sectioo ... ....... .35 Di""iplinary R_rt . . ....... 44 Legi<ht ...... W",.,.Up. ........ 45 AOOut M.rn!><r$. Among Firms. ........50 Yoluntu, Lowyo" Program ........52 Rtctnt Dt<i'ioru "....... 63 M"""';ou ... .. ....... 69

,-_ _ -),- -- ---

415 Drn<r A......... _""""'ry...... 361G4 (205) 269· 15t5 • FAX (2051

.. ___.._T.II.'...",CAIl 0;"",,,, ot .......... ___ .____ .11_ ... """"" ~_"'

-.........

"-"'<-.ro. ............... 0;_

..........._

... _ _

.............. s...;... ___ .. __ --"'''''Jo I _

IICLE" eo.-it,........... ~~._~,Oior>t""_ """""" ........,. __.__c . _ '-,_.........

"_........... c.c....,..

Z(il~10

c.......... ..........,. ___ ...- - " ' a i < _

.......... 0- ......... ion, .... "' _ _ _ _Tr><\' 0..-..

..........

...-..-"'VU'_ IOL'A"""""' __ ""'-,

_..... ........... I,""P._

AU.RA."" ST~T~ II.O~ C ~ I"TER roR PROI'ESSIO•..-.u R£S POSSIBILIlY STAf1' 415 Drn<, A..." .... M....,.,.,..,...... 361G4 (205) :/69·1515 ' FAX 12051 261-6311 ...... . __ . . ,_ .__ ,~c....a.i___

_ c.n...tc..-J ____ J. _MclMll _c-."c..-J_. __ . l..~""~_

~ _

""""""' ' ...... ~

~'",.~,_

"" ....................... _. __ .• ,

'MO~

...

..... 0 - . .... _

.. c

' ~Ci'oA._'

•

,_, ..... 0 - ..... ...... . -

'._i-... ',"",'-''''' ' _ , .. __ __ • '"Ci'oA. _ .......... Ci'oA. ... __ ...... ... Ci'oA._ ... '._

............."--.,.........,........... '_."' ............ ~

~.-

ooc.. ... 0-. _

c _ .._,.......... ,...0c-._ ,.,.,._ - . _ .....,. - - .. _ ....... _·11•• _ . """'''",.,.-. ............. - ., ........... _ ..._.......... '0.":.''..."''''.'._ _ .... .. _ '' . . . 0-. • • . _

. . . . . . . . . ' ...

L-..."'"'",_ '...00-, e>-._ .......... . . . . . . . . . _ ... _ . '''"' __ _ .. " _ . ',", Ci'oA._"',',"'_ N _ .. ",_ · ' ... ... ....... a 7• • . _

__ ........' ' " """'" _ W"""_ ........ . """ Ci'oA. w _ _ ,..,. ,,.. .... "_,,-_ ,,.. """'"" -,., "_0. _..'-'''' Ci'oA.''''''''''' 0.0~, ................ . .,'" Ci'oA. _ _ ',_H .... ""_.,. ,"'0..

_ --. -,_. .,- .,,,,,--,.,. -' ~_

, _ ........ _ . " .. 0 0 - , _ " ......

Ci'oA.

__ .... .. _D.-. ........,·,...

"""'" -

.... I, . - • . _

0.-."""'_ •. _

... •

, . """

.. _ " , ..... ,. , .

Ci'oA. - . . ' . _ 0 - ' , ,.., 0.-. _ , _ . _ . ' ... 0 ..... COo1r .. " _ . " c.. . . . ,,,, 00-, J , _ ,_"_,,,,,

e>-. _

H._. __ ..... Ci'oA...__ , _

__._o.-._H.. __ ",., .--...""""" _ _ . ..... Ci'oA._ ... _

.0.0-..._ ....,._ ........... _ . _ - . . . _ _ "$0 _ _ _ ' _

co-._ .. _

_,_ _ '_ -"'_

----<>-, . . .".,-... . __ . _0-. .".". . ._.

-~.-"" ......... '_._c-.w ...... a _CiT·. ... _ _ • _

" - - '''.00-, _

""" __ - . . . ._ . . 0, _ _ __...... _·0. . _ ...... _ •

-CIwryI """'"

..... " "'""..-, _

• .,.. 0 - . .. t .. _

wAnn_ ...... ......... _. ________ ....,'" ~ _J,'. .... _"'-- ,,-,-. _

""""'" _ _ • , -..., ....... _

'-_

Cow<,

.."

...-"'

~,P . O.80 ... 'I< . ............ ,

2 1January 1993

"'-

_... . . . . . . . .__.___. _______..__. ,. " " .......""'-'-._-_._ _-.......... __.... ...,.,._... __. . ....,. ...... ,.-"'''' ......... --,,.. ......_ ..._.,.... -...... ...-____ ...' ____ 10"'"_

......"ec.-! __._-""too l.......

EIhico_~

cu:.:src--..~

...........

'I • •

H _

p,...idont·, ...,. .... ", ....... "... Fad.iII'b Poll ... ElocutM> Di,..ct¢r'. Report

. .. ... ___ .. ~E_

.. ._________________._16

8g Tim<AilgA uu'is ................ ........ " ... ..

Openln' of Court

l>or - - , ~ P.O. eo. "50, ......... ' .... ~38'O'

"'381o,

THE ALABAMA iJ\WYER

PRESIDENT'S PAGE

1111

re you genuinely .. t"fi~ with th~ pm!k" of law as it u;sll today? If so, you are in • distinct minority. According to a reuntly

ature-the rise of the "Rambo" lawyer. Mure and mu .. lawyers and judge. complain that we have entered a new Ua of rothlessness in the practice of law. Some counul released .UMY conducted by Washington's undoubt<:dly e<;uale zealous representation with ridicule, highly regarded Peter Hart and A<so<;iates, QfIly 27 per· intimidation and humjliation of the opposition, buth cent of the lawyers questioned ~re substantiany .. tislawyer and dient. AccUSiltioru of misconduct a .. increasfied with the stat. of the legal profession. Actually. this ingly hurltd wilh impunily and Rule II sanctions are should come as no .urpri..,. SU1'\I'I')'$ over the past fi\l\' rought agairut opJlO$ing counsel with alarming frequenyears ha~e repeatedly announced that ever-increasing cy. Studi.s t hroughout the Unit.d State. reveal a numbers of I.~rs were unhappy in their work and with widespread concern ower this gradual c~ in the practhe quality of their H\I\'s. Between tice of law from a call ing charac1984 and 1990, the number of ter ized by mutua l respect for young laW}'en disenchanted with .1Ive.... ries tu one uf obrilSi'>'e con· their ('.IIrtt. chok~ jumped 77 perfrontation. One judge underscored cent even though their incoffin the dilemma this way: had ri..,n. "TlIere must be a way to conlin· The three most frequently cited ue the spirit of the adversarial proreasons for this growing discontent fession of law wi t hout the are (I) the lack of public respect mentality of warfare and bitter· for the legal profes.ion, (2) the ness. We have losl sight of the fact absence of lunda mental courtesy that ...... are all brothers and sisters among collugues. and (3) the of a truly noble profusion. We inordinate amount uf time and should be sho"'ing the besl of the effort spenl in responding 10 con· role of law. Not how to conduct a brawl." tentious discovery. motions or other tactics designed to intimi· Professiona lism hal bun dale or harau un.·s opponent. defined ill' our bar as the pursuit The~ concerns appear 10 be vatid of the learned art of the law as iI C t• .-.ne.... ..... tt, Jr. and. in fact. interrelated . common calling, with a spirit of The psychologists tell us that service to the public and the client .. If·esleem and Ihe salisf'ctiun with our state in life undertaken with competence. integrity and civil ity. ~ which accompanies il. come. in ""rt. from the lmowl ~ concept uf lawyering envisioned ill' that definilion is the that we ha'>'e the respect and affection of olhers. After the anti~i, of that reOected by "Rambo" tacti". Addition· recent presidential campaign. there can be little doubl ally. experience teaches us that a victory achieved by thai the ""blic hold!; lawyers in low esteem. The bashing such \act;" creates on~ long· term and implacable ene· of the legal profession thallouk place there did nol o<xur mies ..... ho will not soon furgel their bitter e'perience. on a "hunch" lhat such a tactic would meel with \/Oter It occurs tu me that there may ...... 11 b<o a relationship approval. Opiniun samples liken ill' campaign officials between lawyer and public dissalisfaction with the CurreHected a pre-txisting public distaste for the legal com· renl state of the legal profession and Ihis burgeoning phenomena of the calluus disregard of fundamental munity. Co~uently. il made political senu to lie the nation's economic woes 10 an already unpOpular group. courttsi.s among lawyers. Certainly, ...... cannot and La ....~rs were the perfect scapegoat. It is little comfort 10 should not expecl the public to respect US if ...... do not know that the charges leveled turned out to be complete· demurutrate respect for each other. And. we must have Iy fat.., based 3ll the)' were on half· and quarter·troths the respect of the public if ...... are to reliin our exclusive and, in!.(Klle imlancu. rank sperol"lion, ~ public per· franchise on the practice of law. But. there is more 10 be ception that lawytrs fust<:r and profit from an oppressive gained from professionalism and ci\ility than that. Chief explosion of contentious and meritless litigation Justice Harold Clarke uf Georgia put it this way. remaim. "Our .ffurt about professionalism is not a public relaThis false perception is. no doubl. aggravated ill' a partion> effort. We are not doing thi'just to get the praise uf (Conll'nuedon page 9) allel phtnomtnon being chronidtd in Currtnl legal liter·

4 I January 1993

THE AI.J\8AMA lAWYER

POLL The lut poll surmd to str;k~ ~ chord u rudu participation more tN.n doubl.d that of tilt Slpttmber 1992 poll. With $OIl'It trtpidation. the .ditors now want you. honest appraisal of tilt quality of The Alabama WU'Iier'. Do y(lU read it? If so, which featurts do)'Oll lik. or dislike? In snort. we want a critique of 1M publiClltion. Tak. a morrJent to complett Ihe following quutionNir. ind then lu it to stat. bar hei6quarnrs. tlo Marpret Murphy. at 12(5) 261 -6310. If you do not tv."" ac:c ... to a l;ax mKhint, )'011 rTliy mlil it to P.O. Box 4156. Monttomtry. AJab;un;I 36101. All ~rs must t.. RECEIVED by JlfJlW)I29. ]993 to be intlud· tel in Ihr multi published in tilt ~rth iUut.

CRITIQUE OF THE ALABAMA LAWYER I. The following btst dt scribu my

"'-,

use of The Alabama

• . _ _ I new. read it b. 1skim it c. _ [rm:I xltcttd porlionf • • _ _ [IUd it in itl mtirety

3. Ptease pr<wide any comments on additions. deletions and changes to TM Alabaffl(1 Lou},." which you would like to Ite:

2. The /(lilowine bt.t dtKriba my rudmg IWlits "illl rupee! 10 the futum indicattd:

Pr'v.siiknt:S Pa~ I. _ Always read b. _ _ So"",!i",.. rtad , . _ _ New. r.ad

._- """' ....

£xecutiVi! Di=lor's Report • • _ _ Always ••ad

b. _ _ Sometimes rtad Never IUd

IAgiJIo/Wf Wrap-up

b. _ Somdima fUll , . _ _ New. read

FaclsIFax Poll RESULTS In the Nowmbo:r issue of the UMJIf"", the editors iWttd for your p.I."icip;otion in (lUr Jt((IfId informal po/li"ll d thc ....... be rs. The r..... questions unttr"td on thc ItlcctiorWloction d i\ldiu. [;ghty..r...... tlomt)'S mpondtd to the poll. tithcf by faxi"i 01" moiling in their tUpOn5tS. Here.re the raults:

/Jar 8ritfslilbout MernI!ffs. Amon{I fimu

•. _ _ AI..·oys re;ld b. _ _ Sometimes road t. Never rtad

I. 24'16 agree that trial and appellate courl judges in Alab,ama should continue to be elected under the present format, wIlile 65'110 d~m wilh thaI.

Building Alobomas Cwrthousa • _ _ AJo..'OY" b. _ _ Somrtimr.s rod ,. _ _ Nevn rod

...,.d

Sutwant;", 1.1 articles • _ _ A""...ys road b. _ _ Sometimes rtad c. _ Never read DiKip/inary Rq1QTI I. Always rod b. _ SomrtirntS rod

c. _

Never IUd

R«ml D«isiotrs •. _ _ AIWolY" rad b. _ Somdimn rtad

Never read

THE Al.ABAMA lAWYER

Of tholt who rU pOndt4:

eu.: Opporiunilies •. _ _ Ah.·a)lS read b. _ Sometimes read

,. _ _ N"'"tr...,ad

r.wng I.mqen "&etion

.. _

A'..""ys read b. _ _ SomrtimQ rod t. _ NtYtr rud

M~u

_- ,-"'"

b _ _ Sometimes road c. _ Newr read

~ 1«1 ..... should continue with the p;ortisin elKtion 01 judgu. 65'110 1«1 we should adopt a])1'O«6u..., lor roonp;ortiwl ekction. 23'110 1«1 after tht init..W eltction 01 Judla., any subsequent election would be on the !wis of their rKOfd 0Il~. VId 5'110 feel ..... should idopt roonp;ortisin eltclions Mol) elret on~ on the twis 01 the judge', rtWTd .

3. 12'16 want to retain tht prestnt l)'Stfm 01 ailowi"ll unlimited contributions and expenditul'tS in judicial .-acts. :rnt. Wolnt some type 0( limitation. ~ lawr ~ing a limit or aIJsoIute prohibition OIl conttiblltionJ by lawton. VId $'10 f;wor~" ina llimit OIl 110m OjItnditum m:I contrillutions..

c..-mor.

4. tzw, /m)r judicial ~in\Jtllnts by the ~ bvor lJll)Ointment by the Covtmor from i list submitted by l local commilt«. I~ wanl lJlI)Oinlrnmt by" local commilt .. and t'llo chose none oItht choica listed .

m r.. 1we ,hould fOllow the federal system of appainting J~5

for life. while S09t disagree with that Option. JinwIIY 1993 15

Here's What Lawyers Who Have Invested In Our lime Saving Knowledge Say: , ' •. J.lrtf lIS riJII( uti mo"", .. Witb op[miw9lc~nltl using Ibis I'Qpiti ItrFiC( II't Uin'/Slfford fQ lI'ail Imd I'air

0111"''''"' udltlHomplt1t publilAti~1IS. With

ALABAMA 1.l1li' !lttkl, 11'1'8'/ lilt (lISt sNmmarirs

IIlm~ jlj1M! AS the CIlStS art rtlrllStll.~ ~ ""'" L ~ 1 _ ~ w...n, ~ 1/obooI.I,

, ' ...n immniill/t 1I/m.,,11 B,ul rimfflmr...11

Mlullblt, ~ftifllllOOllI';th (onrilt, '1lSflNflld, fJjmlllllrUJ, ~judl-, vrallHi::td by (OUrl lind /tjllJ topic.~ ~

IIUUrIIlt

IIy w. jIrlloo, """'" 10 Willa, C....." AIobomo, ~ClIIvI~""_)

, '1 wild IImi JISt ALABAJIA IAI' Ilitil.t II Bim WI( u (fiji

in hlllPing ..hAt rastS wm heidtd IIlli Ixr/lllhty

111111 IIff((1 "'1.!lirnts' ji/n. /1 ;, in'lIilUlbk /(! tlxbl<SJ p!'II(rilio1l(f. 4 ~ ~.1. -".~ Io Rim>Io, ~~

, ' Our rlitntuxprrt us flIltllll1brrllluf 1111 dtrrlopmrMJ. Ofttn this rt~ujrtllfJtndjnB nodillablt rimt. ALABAMA 1.411 W{{iI, is tbr ftutest lind 1m Itnirt 1I~IIi1dlt'Ri,inB lIS 1111 tbt infmnlltio~ 1I'r rued Inli il tIIita IDt ltl$/i",( /(! UK, Ourrlirnts lIin IIntl 11'1' .,j",~ ~ ~

l fft>, \\'IllI:ti, GImnooI 10 fft>, ......... _

"Ascourt attonlCYS, we must flay jlbrc{fst of appellate declstons a timely l bam~

Olt

Howew!r, the publicationl ~~ailable '>imply did rIOt meet all my needs. One doe! not i!ddr~ an the dedlion!, the othom were much 100 oow, and compuler services 100 expensivt in bolh time and mooey. 1~ a weei<ly alert, a fall, concise summary 01 dedsionsto rwke me aware 01 all developments w I (ould immroiately use the ones impo<lanllO my proKtice. As an aouwer I uealed ALABAMA Law WWdy. The r~flOOse has been O'Iemthelming. Our subscribers inc: ll!de hundreds oIl.Jwye~ who are now l<IVing ~me and IIlO!leY while 3quiring the koowledge they need, lederaland !Iale judges, libraries, insurance compan;e,s and bank!. Wr:'re the new kid on the block and we're here 10 Slay! I urge you to become a subSCriber today and bel:ome a part 01 lhe practic~ that are selling the new sUndard.

J. Duane Can t re ll. Editor ~I ~L. "H. LL "'.10. Fl~ . IO!C .".0'• • rOC 10,,, ~al"nel p'o'

J C. U

U o'

In Hoy,. Coun,.1 2", U

~l S<:~

01 La ", (Q.adu,,,.

Ta . Progrom) \'02

TimeisMoney. Now You Get More of Both with ALABAMA LawWeekly, aWeekly Summary of Alabama Legal Developments. • Wbyare More alld More Attor1leys CIJoosil1g Alab.",.lAw Weekly?

•

-'-.-

The reasons are simple. Each week, ALABAMA La\\' Weekly prO\idcs subscribers \\;th succinct,

•

.--' ..,-.:.. . -.

.....- . _""'""' .--....-"'-- .... .. -

ca5}"to-understand

summaries of aU Alabama Appellate Court decisions almOST 3S fast as the decisions an: rclcased .* ' U~~

•

. .

_"', ....

.;.

....•

•

ITk.llCd on FricUr Nt

=.~ ..... ~ .. -..

MORE POWER TO YOU. (011921· 1075 Ie)

SlJbscri~

/0 ALABAMA Low Wee~/y

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT MOVING! APOLOGIES! SURPRISE!

ily II ::nn~ yur~ll bune~citlngOOtalyour

new slatt bar headquarters. Al long wt. we

are through with C(Nls\n.JctiQn, Yl'corut ruction, miSKll

dndlinu and disappointments. The construction proj«I is finilllfd MId we .... "in", This W» 00 srNll project. ~n though one contrac· tor..t.o declined to bid on it-for tIIIt ruson-told U$ it was. It WJS not U$'f worlci"ll in I building that WJS «ina corutNCI.~ and rtr'lOMttd. TM Prottcl is IIIIT1O$\ fiw monu., !)YenlUI'. but tht wall ~ bm1 worth it. The ,WI" has bftn truly rNgnifi·

cenl th roughout our chaos. Things wert 110\ always USy-(l' plnsant-but ftt~ibility and anticIpated ntw working conditions UiuagW INny frwtratioos. Com. mlUus and otMrs who had med·

inQ$ 'ch,duled bued upon lht (on\'lIe\ completion date, Wert !<lually IIWbll: and oooptntiYt.. [ ~ whm you visit, you will igrft tht WIll was worth ill Our ntW 51!'« ilIlooo'$ 1,1$ to I>M:

up to

KVell

meet ings occurring

sim ultllnf(lusly. On. room holdJ I~ rttl'JOllS. l~r 25 \0 30, two

others !>old six 10 ten, one holdl up to 80, and two sma lit, rooms hold six to eight, W. now 1-.."" a vi.itingla...,...r', office with adjacent Kcreurial space and IWO other ,mall pri· vale officn for viJitor UK, and the b... pr.,ident once "IIlin hlI iln office, We h .."" Ihret rtfTtShmenl .. ren and on. modtst ca.ltri"ll kltdw:n. We ho"" handicap KCtiI Vld visitor ~rki"ll. The lIddition of two privale It"phone booths hlI betn nmkd and long ow:rduo:. The m lire ltate bar opmotioo is "IIlin under one roof in this IoCition. Shortly after the first ollhe )'fIT, when I few remaini"ll furnishings ITt rKeMd, we will dedi· ca.t. our new fa\:ility with I Wftk.long rt<:fP\ion, Special days will be dtsignattd for the moTt denstly populated ci rcuits, bUI we hop" e""ryont will make In ~/forl to visll il their con""nitnce. We are alrtady taking rtK.va·

8 !January 1993

lions for space utiH ... tion fur d~pOSitioru, c1i~nt ronfu ~nCts, arbitration ami bar· relattd group meetings. This is our prof'$$ion'~ building. r h~ you will U5e it lind visit it often.

Apologies! ~ best laid plans an be thwarted by 11 computtr. Wt knew thr ~ 0110.000 Iictrutt; and ~pKW mrm· IItnhip Ciroh '.:ould lit 11 Ir.mtnodous undtrbkinllCI)I1Siduing the job now done by two ptOpIe had btf;n done by;at 67, Unlortu~ttly,

"ast

our computer program and the forms have taken 100 long to muh, and, for that ruson, wt "perienud I d~lay in g~U ing the 1992·93 liunst certificates in the mail. Also, we uperienced an inordinately largt number 01 improper rtmittancQ whkh 1-..,.. tabn long hours of <Mrtime to corrtcl. It is hoped tNt ill 01 the; "buts" now Ire out 01 the $)'$tem and It will lit smooth uiling fur

1993·94. SUlllri 5e! The lmendtd pro h;oc: vi« rul. hiS r.vul~d by far Ind away a grnttr number of non· ... id.nl ~rs from other jurisdictions practicing in Alabama Ihan tVer imagined. The new rulu implemenlation, with an ./f«,li"" date 01 October L 1992, revaltd 186 such laW)'frs applying in lhe firsl Wftk 01 filing. AI this writing, " .. ha,.. Or hi"" in procus 386 pro hac "ict IppliQ,tiom. an. of these non·Nmitttd w..')'frs ha.s 86 cu.t5 pendil\ll in ~. This new 'yM~m 01 tr<ltkin~n« 1M init~1 O\.. r· Io»d iJ prO«Sstd-wili Mford our judgH thr fxb upon which to itt how milnY illomeys I .. ;abusing our rules geMming Nmission. Many, in lid, may need 10 tak~ steps 10 be I(\m;Ued in A~ml, lIi~n thei. uttnsn.. prxtice in this SUle, 10 ..wid I chi~ 01 unauthorized prxtite. This rule ~ppjjn 10 pooice in III of A l~bama '5 state court. Vld bdore her ageneies. •

T1IE AlABAMA lAWYER

abruiw form 0( ildYoacy ttu.1 SftRlS 10 otherwise pe~ our proftssion. Pub1;lh~d In the November illut of this ;oolTlll weu 1m Imm 0( professioN.l· imo adopled by your bo»rd 0( ~r com· missioners. It reminded me of how I should conduct myself IS I IIWyeT. A Pin 0( our crttd rtquius that we offer 10 opposing p,lITtin ,lnd their counsel "flimtSf, integrity ~ ci\;lity." We au

OUr fellaw (humlrl beings). 1'o11at we aft roily kdil\llior is .•• 1M kind of self· " tisflCtiOn thll you gd from doing rijlht for righn own Wt." We au fortllNllt in Abbama that IN> of our petn NW f.lltn victim 10 this

laid by au . fanbeau thl Ihese are Imang the mast powerful1 wUpOns • lawrtr an poutl' If we follaw the 5!Irl. dlords 0( pro(nsioNlism ldopIed by our cammissiontn, 0( which civilily is In in~gnl PIort, our s.olisfaction with 1m 5I.ltt of OUr PI"Okssion. and. indeed. with our own SUle IS prlclking laWyerl. should musunbly illCRlSt. It is hoped the at~mo(tm public will follow. •

r-----------------------------------------------, _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ............ ldmtJfiation (SocW SKuntyl ".......... C'-ont:

Mr.

...

Pull Name O""("05S Phont

Nurri)er

Vu, of Admilolion

"""'-Birt~l •

Firm

OIf.u M.>ilina Ad.btlol

0If". _ City Strut Addmo (il d1ffottnt from r'I"IIoiti"8 StItt adcIrqs) z'''''~'~ ... :======_'~~:":"_=============

City ZIPCock ___ ______________________ J L ______________________

NOTICE JUDICIAL AWARD OF MERIT NOMINATIONS DUE lho Bo.td of Commi ............ of tt... ... Iobo .... Stole 8,0, will -.wt"'" lor tho StI\IP bor'I ludic~ ... word of Me<~ Sh "".Y 15. Nominllionl ."""Id be P<~I,ed and rrwiled 10 ...... klT . ~, 5«.o..,y. !Ioud of 8.IIr erni,, '1 Itrs. AI.oob;.mo Sl.J.t. 8M, Box 671 , _tpnery. fK~

t'''....

'.0.

ALob;.rno 36101 .

Tho ludic~ Aw.ud 01 Merit _ alOblI!hed in 1981. Inri tho r.... <ecipiem _ SenIOf U.S. 0;..00 . . . . ~ H.lynne an:! ~ired CiKu~ II.dge ~ O. H.o~. Tho ~ w &fd I, noI ~Iy ~n ~nnu.ol _~rd. It .... y be p<-med to ~ judge whethet stile or fedf:ul court.. trl~1 or appellate. who 10 delermined to have comributed li,., lll<:lnt.

TIlE: AI.ABA."IA LAWYER

Iy 10 tho ......... ni"'alion <Jllullice In "'I~ ..... Tho <ecip;en! io ~ed with 1 cl)"Ial tho ye¥ 01 ~ion.

ga.m bearing the $l.>te ba, ....1 """

~¥1'~edbyll~COI'O'_

oppoinled by !he ~

of tho stile bor which mak.. a lecor.o ..ercUtion 10 tho boord <Jl ~ d .... w'oIh~ 10 I ,.... "'_ or ...-IIechet tho _Md o.houId be PI_,1Ied .... _11'''- YNI". NominoIionI W>uId include a dtt.>iled bor:9~1 ptCJfi~ 01 tt... nomi...... .....r a 1"IarJ;II,ve outiin("II!he ~ifoc;n cororibu· lo.nroJ tt... nomi ...... h.>o mode 10 tho administration 01 jvstice. Nominations may be !<JPpOtIed wi,h letters 01 todorsemenr:.

Jam"''Y 1993/ 9

BAR BRIEFS Chid Justice Sonny Hornsby

has

n~mtd

Oliver

Gilmore as ~dmin ;.t.alive dineto. of courts in Alabama. M•. Gilmore wu named acting di re,-

Ollmo..

tor in June when Judg e Leslie John son r•• igned to becO)rne the director of the MiSSissippi Judicial Coll ege. Gilmore had served as director of finance at AOC since 1988. A native of Lanett. Alabama, Gilmore has bttn with AOC since 1978. He wilS

than 56.000 square fee and 14 seminar roorm. conference facilities. th ..e COmputer education training ctas$Tooms. faculty oWcn, lounges. and a 40.000· volume capacity law library. TW<lledur. auditoriurm. serviced b}' a state·of·theart audio· visual support system. will provide facilities for stud.ntl attending tM 23 course offerings throughout the

Y\'ar. U.s. Representative Bill Dickin.\On was fi,.,;t elected to COng.... from .\Outheast Alat.ama in 1964 and has served continuousty since tMn.

previously emplo;-ed at West Point Pepperell. Wesl POint. Georgia. lie is a grad-

Uale of Auburn University and i. married to the former Kathy Woodward of Op.lika, and they have three childre".

Th e Dickinson La w C e nle r , IlIImed fOT the Honorable William L. Dickinson, U.S. H(>Ilse of Represenb_ tives. 2nd District. was dedicated Octo)--

bu 26. 1992. The Center, located at Maxwell Air FOTce &so in Monlgonwry, will house the new Air FOTC< Judge

Adwcate G<!ne.al School ~nd the Directorate of Legal Information St!Vices and will o~n May 1!I93. This $6.1 million center fur legal education and information management will endose mOrt

RIDING THE CIRCUITS lIIanh.n County BaY Auoc: I.Uon

Officer:. for /993 aN':

,,", ident: JOHN C. CULIAHORN A/lJerlville Vice·pr..ident: JAMI:S R. BERRY AIIJer/uilie S«K!J.ry/lroullrtt:

TJ.CARNES A/1Jer/ville

10 ' January 1!I93

~",." Willi ..... L DIcklnoon <lr!d'ht» U. o..tmJJ ~ Go &,gd. """"""'" 01 Ai< /)oi_ ""';'f. in ""'" 01 MIuwIt. ~ u... c--

UF, namd in ~DO.F .r DidiMOO', mao,

cotl,n'!><J,ions t. 'M M<1xt.YIJ·Crm'n rommlmit, durintJ hi< 28 JI"I1" in off~ - _ _ \:sAt'

tion Asoociation of Amnic,,', "Cong...sional Appreciation Awa rd", and the American Securit~ Council'. 'Peace through Strength"' award. Oickin.on is a native of Opelika, Alabama and obtained his law degrle from tM University of Alat.ama in 1950. He pTllCticed in Opelika and from 195153, he served .. a judge in the Opelika City Court. He became judge of the Court of Common Pie... then served as judge of tM Juvenil. Court of Lt. Coun. ty and judge of the Fifth Judicial Ci rcuit of Alabama. In 1963. he moved to Mont · gomery to serve as vice'president of Southern Railway, a post h. held until h. won Alabama's Second Congressional !tat in 1%4. He .. rved in the U.S. Na"l' during World War II and as an Air Fo rce Resen.·e Judge Advocate from 1951·68. H. is married to the former Barbara Edward. of Plant City. Florida. H. has four children.

".mes D. H ...Is , .Jr., formerly of the Montgom ..~ firm of Harr;, I< Harris and currently a partne r in the Jl.o.,.'ling Green. Kentucky firm of Iiarlin Ii< Parker, has been appointed by the Kentucky Supreme Court a.o; a member of the Kentuck)o Continuing Ltgal Education Commission.

He has served as the Ranking Republi · can for the 1..1 II }'t'ars on the House

Copies of newly adopted Rule.

Armed Services Comittee and is also senior Republican on the subcommittee on Pro;::urement and Military Nuclear System •. and i. a member of the subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities. As ranking member. Dickin· .\On is an ex off1cio member of all sub· committe.. of the full Committee. Cong ressman Dickinson's Alabama district is home to thrtt military instal · lations. Maxwell Air Force Base fAir Uni. versity), Cunter Annex to .11."""'11 (Ai r !'orce Communications). and Fort Ruck· er (U.S. AT1l1}' Aviation Center). Dickinson has r(ceived numerOU5 awards. including the highut honor from the Amer;c~n Comervative Union, thl ·Stat .. man Award", the Army A"ia-

Qoveming Attomey Discipli_

in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Ci rcuit (Addendum Eight); newly adopted 11 th Circuit Rule 33-1 which ntablishes an Appell ate Conference Program; and amendm.nts to Addenda Five, Six and Seven of the Rules of the U.S. Court of Appea ls for the Eleventh Circuit are now available without charge. These roles and adden· da took effect on October 1, 1992 following public notice and opportunity for comment pursu~nt to 28 U.S .C. §207I(b). To obtain copies contact; Office of the Clerk, U.s. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. 56 Forsyth Street. NW. Atlanta, GA 30303, (404) 331·6187. • THE A~BAMA !.AWYF.R

Edw.rd E. C.rn •• rcttntly bHlm( the judgo on the United 51.1.1" COIlrt 01 Awab for the Elevmth Circuit when he was sworn in OctG~r 29, 1992. 1M ceremony. which took piKe in Montgomery lOl the I'rilllk M. Johnson. Jr.l'edtnl Building. included mnorkli by U.S. StRlton Howell Heflin lOnd Richard C. Shelby, AllOblma SUprem( Court Justice OSCIr W. Adlml. Jr .. MontQomery Mayor Emory I'olnur lind Morris S. ikts. director or lilt Southern Powrty L.iw Center In Montgomery. TJ. Camn." mem~r of the state bar and Carnes' father . administered the oath. Carnes wH nominated by the President to fill tilt VlOcal\C)' Idt when Judge Frank JohMOt1 assumed .M:nior 11.1.1\1$.

IlfWnt

CIoiof J~. Cnold B. Uro'II E. Cama

THE AW\JWoIA W\WYER

emu.

n-. ill"" .....

Sou,""'" _'I '-

TjoI/.,. Judt< PI>,m,

K,,,,·jl<~

J"~

Januat)' 19931 11

1~ BUILDING ALABAMA's ~ , " II

, ... _ .... '\

COURTHOUSES

TALLADEGA COUNTY COURTHOUSE 8N SAIlfUEL A RUMORE, JR.

The following continues a his/GrV of A/o/xJmQ" rounlv courlhousestheir f)rigins (lnd rom" of lhe people ",ho wnlriburtd 10 Ilrei. grot&lh. Th. AI....... "" ... fI' plom to "m 0"., rountV~ ~ in ftICh isslNoIfhe"""", uiM. If ~ haw tm6 photographs 01

tariJI Ot' pnsml rourl~ ~ fer· film! /0: Somud A Rumon. Jr., Miglilmico .. Rumor" 1230 BrOlCn Morx Tolft•. Birmingham, Alobomo

IC(m/

"'"

IIII

tK name 10 "TallaaeQa" 11 known modtrni..... d~y

motor sports Tieing r~ns. b~inl ont of the fntut

racetracks in the world. H......~r. IhI' n;ome II'KU ;U roots d«p into Abba· ......·l l ndian~. In the Cruk l~nIlUlgf. ·T~I .. ~· mans 1(JWfI. and " Aligi" mans bordtr. A liltrll trlnslltion of th. combined words funning Tlilidelli muns "border town", TlI~dtga. ilfl Upper Crtek Indi·

an villag•. was a border town

nt~r

the

Chtrok« and Chickasaw lands. Tallade· ga County is completely bordered on the wul by Iht Coon Rivu, wllich serwd &I a boundary bdw".n til.,. Indiu! tribes. Mkr 1Ilindilln ~ ofwllite >l:t· tiers al Fort Mimi on the Mobile RMr on Au,ust 30, 1813 pr«ipi tated til. Creek Indian WIT. Cowmor William Blount of Tenntuee ailed for volun· tttrs lnd Knt troops under Major em· eTlI Andrew hckson to figllt tht IndiiflS and protect tnt souIMm fron· tier. One of the major battles in thi. Wilr with the Red Stick branch of the Cn:ek Indians look place at Talladega.. Jackson u>l:d aboul 2.000 men 10 encircl e lhe 12 1 Jilnw.ry 1993

Rtd Sticks. Thr Bait," of Tllbdtga took place Nowmbu 9. 1813 in tnt ,""",,,I In .. of today's downtown Tallade,a. TN figlllln, _ fielU. but the Indians finally broke out of tile tncirclement. Jackson lost 14 men lnd it is e!limated lllat the Indians lost 500. Thr Creek Indian War .nded the nelt ~u an.r lilt Battle of Horseshoe Bend and the ensuing Truty of Fort Jackwn, whicll WII concluded on Au,ust 9. 1814. By tlli' treaty. Iht Creeks wne fon:rd to ,i~ up mucll of lheir territory with 1M uctplion of the lIistoric looi· an lands $(lUtllllld nst of tilt COO$O. Rive r and nortll of a line runnin, approlimlldy from prtsenl-dllY Wetumpluo to prtstnt ·diy Eufau4 on the CeorgilI border. Tallackga n:maincd in Indian country. Bdor. tilt tnd of tilt decade. Ille State of AlWIN was cruted. A signifi· canl "rlOlmt of land louted within the boun\larin of Alabima remained under Indian tOnlrol until the Tn:aty of Cus·

Kill. Signed on April 4. 1832. ttw tn.aty t",n,fur.d ill of tile territory of the Cruk nalion to the Stilte of .o\IabaJni. AUbirrv. _td no lime ;wimiLaling Ille lind. On December 18. 1832 Ihe Alabilnll ltgislitun: created nine ntw count,,, from thil Indian territory. TlleK included Barbour. &olon (later called Cailloun). Chambers. Coosa. Macon. fulndolph, Russell. Tallapoosa, and Talladegl. Alttr tilt area was 0!lt11td for Ktlltmmt. onl» " f....• ~U:. passed brior. rllO$t of tnt Indw.s >rtr. givm Land in Oklahoma lnd relllO\led 10 tnt Wul. IInlil the Truly of Cuswill. this Ilnd _ I wildtrTIf:U inhailittd onl» by Indiins, II few Irllden and some wllit. Sqwott..,. The end mlndian conlrol OWr the ttTTitory inspiml a ntw w~,... of migrlltion. Settlers came from~ gil, Tennus«. the Carolinas. and othtr AllbilN counties. The first pernunent Hltlers Clll"Ie to Tlllad~ga. Counly in 1833. The;- seltl ~d

nar I 5Prillllat tIw: lit( of. tIw: &ttlt of. nn..dtQI. Thi' ioe.Ioti<ln bocame krl(lW first as Bi g Spring, then The Ban l(ground , then Ta lladega Baltl(ground , "nd fi~11y T"ll.odtp. An act of. the U1iJlatUrt on JanUlry 12, t8J3 prOYilkd th.lot the tempOrary ,u t nf justice f<l r Talladegl County would be at the f allade· p ll.auleground until a perma· nent site ""as selected. Eligible loc.at ions for consid(Ulion as tht pumanent county sut were the Talladega Butle· ground. the ford of. the Talladega Cre( k or Wido"" An son's place, and Mardisville. On December 18. 1&33 Tanadep wu confirmed u tho p" rm .. ntnt ..,.. t of juslice and it has remained so eveT linee. The first courls were held in a log house nur Ih. Ipri ng. Olh .. building,. induding churchu Ind Iaverns. wert used u tempOrary locations. TIltn. on bnuary~. 1836. a leg· islati~ e act provid ed for the buildi ng of a ptr"",nen! brkk cou rlhouse. 0 ... source recounts Ihat the cou rlhouu ""Ii compld ed in 1838. 1I0wtwr, olh.. lOurctS indic.at. thai the building was nol finally and fully finished un til 1844. tn any .vent, the Talladega County C<lurthouw has the dislindion of boing the oldest conli . nously us.ed COWlty courthouse in lhe Sute of Alabama. fo pay for the courthouse. a special group of taxH was levied on FebrUl')' L 1836. The.. ,.,.. r. the fint of many taxes Ihu l\l,d to be Inused before the courthouse coul d br completely paid olf. Sort>< of. the mort intertStillll taus levied ...,.,n 1M infamous time taxu: $1 ~-~ , J•.

... ,,_.... -..,... -

_A._~

_._..... __ h

Sct"CO' .. ~ ...

a .......... . .

--~ F...... ' - _ ...-

110 .... _ , , _ . . """ .. , :

""" &_

_ _ ............'" 0-."" .... '0lIl

c.o:..oo. ,....,......- .".

for every gold WlItch; $.25 for every sil· ver watell; $1 for e-."'lJI metal clock; and S.25 for evelJl other clock. Sin taxes ,.,.. .. common, including a S25 tax for nch billia rd t~bl~; $1 5 for .. retail liquor license in town; $10 lor .. rtIIil liquor li«_ outside of town; SIO lor a

turt ...... rtpairt<l. Also in 1858. IWO 10ids of sawdust wert pu rcllased to ro.>eT lhe courtroom HOOT. Perhap$ Ihis wal done to protect the noo T from muddy ~ or, mort likely, to protect the floor /rom tIw: ernot aim of. t~ chewers. An allocation of S3U(} was m.ldt for loj'Ii ttoons. Fortun.ll.Iy. the courthouse suffe .. d rIO damage during the Civil War ,..~

On D«embe r 19, 1881. tIw:

county commission met to dis-

race track; and $1 for every pack of playillll c.ards sold. IolIntd. given aWlly or otherwise disposed 01. Thert,.,.... a~ ... ]u tans. sl.ow taus. horse and c.attle taus. and \alIt5 on money loantd for inlertlt a.uused allOlinlt the lender, TIlt contract for the building of Ih~ courthouse was 5ig... d February 26. 1836. The building contneton Wi:re JKOb D. Shelley and Robert K. Hamp.son. The contract price ....11$ 5\0,0<)0, The contractors agreed to build a ,truc_ ture 4(} by 60 feel and 30 fetl high abow lhe foundalion. TIlt buildillll_ to ~ve a comict going enlinly nound il and I a.pO/Ito conform 10 plans furni,hed bl' the counly commiuion. The work .... u to include plasterinQ. ca..".,.n · tering, gllZinQ, painling. brick work. and III things ntcusary 10 make lilt building complett and finished in I finl·nte worIunan·1ike rtWlntr. The Irt constant rtftrences in Ihe County Comm ission minutes in the years linee tM completion of the court· house 10 work ... pairs Ind purc~s for the building. In 1845. Iht sheriff "'' IS IUlhoriud to repair altUy roof. In 1848. S2OO .... u aPPIVI'riattdlO rtlTlOl't Iht cupola and cove r the opening. In 1856. the lightning rods on the strue-

cuss plinl for repa iring Ihe courthouse or constTucting a new one. The commiuion adopted a plan to ITI>\l'o1I\t the building proposed by H.R. Thubrrgt, In architect from New Orleans. On May 10. 1882 tile commission awarded I contncl to It.A. Howud for SII.935 t<l complett the work. George O. \\"hHltr _ wper· inltrwlenl 01 construction. AI this lime fuJ1\lctl; and hea\tl"$ were inllilled in Ih courl house. This work was complet· ed in Dtctmbtr 1882. A fence was installed around th courthouse in 1883, The buildillll wfftred roof damage from I storm in ]888. In 1889. Ihe fence was changed ~nd shade Irtu ...... ( plan ted lOTound Ih. buildillll. By April l 9()5. pbns ,.,..re apprOWd l<l aller and rtpair Ihe courthouse. U.K. Cllapm,n of Allinla submitted Ihese pl"n5, R,\\', West received a contract with his bid of $13.50() to ',pooi. Iht building and add an annn. Thi, coo' llruction ...... 1M fiT'll. major addilion to Ih~ courthouse. Photographl taken after 1905 >how that with this addition the building was now shaped like In 191 L a second anne_ was added to the cou rthouse. Charlts W. Culton of Anniston was archltecl for the project. The finn 01 Powtll & Wolsoflcroft Wl$ Iht cont r .. clor. Tht bid prict WIS $16.143. Thillime. addilions wen made on both ,ides of Ihe building 10 change the "T"·shaped structure to a $IIu.lrt. Photot t~ken aft .. 1911 $how Ihe addition and new entnnccs to lhe building. II lornado struck tho courthouse Ma}' 11. 1912. The roof_ dHtroyed. a wa ll wu knocked down, iIIId the dock tawer

I""'.

Janu.ary 1993 / 13

was 10&l. Architect ChlIrlu W. Carlton .gain iUbmilted pIins for the: building mil lhe Unit & Cltdl.. C<lmlruction Comp.my lUbmilled a low bid aUl.67t1 10 camplde the relNlirs. build I new lawe., and insull I new datI<. On FrilQy lilt 13th aI" M.1.rch 1915, ~d luck struck the Talladega Caurthoun once 'I,in. This time I fire dut.oytd the roof Ind inside w.lb of the bunding. but t he ntnio. w.lls ",""ined intact. Fortunately, wlltn tilt fi,e Will di$l;ovt,ed. I former probate office worktr broke the window,

dislodgtd lome brieh. The county tom/TIlssion decided to ~pair the: struetUff, bul lisa made JOme minor impn:M::rrwnu.. Ctu..1ts H. McCoulry r:J Rinnlngham was the Irchi!«l and M.C. Munroe, with. bid of S1,003, WlS <IWlnied the: ..onst1VCtion eontnct.. In the: 19105. rumal1 bfgan to circuLate that the courthouse might bf tom 1Iown. Loal citi~ens Ind g'oups. such ill tht Tilladtga Counly li istorical Ass0ciation, went Into action. On October 18, 1972.39 structures. including the COIlrthowe and surrounding buildings,

opportunity 10 completely rrnQ\'ate. macltmize. landsapt Ind prnt."., itl h;.tone Co-u rthouK. Strttter Wi," aI" Wiltt. Wauon .Ii Colt Archilects of Montgomny suwlitd lhe specifications for the ~novilion. E.G. HlrriS. Jr. 01 JUrriI CO)n$\ruction ComPllllY in Good· water. ~mlI submitted the low bid 5953,736. Whilt tM construction proeHded, the count)' officts ~d to tM old post office building an the court squart. Tht Talla~eal County Courthow.o: is I structure of red brick. whitt marble. stull!ld concrtlt.lt his two stooo. an attic and a basement. It is basically I sqmrr building wilh tlternal dirmnsions of 110 by 104 fttt. 11 il 40 fetl hi8h. III Clu'iul Revival dellils include I ptdmltnltd cent ...! portico lupporttd by two ItU of double columns with decanti"" bands and Corinthian capfuls. i Classical comin. and I pediment with I circular windolol. The firsl·noor windtrw1 a~ crow.... d by tiptrtd briekJ which cr .. te the imprtl-slon aI" heads aI" wheat. On October 2. 1977. Tall~ga Coun. ty hosttd I rclkdic.ation aI" the Tallade· g. County Court house in whll wlS billtd ilIi lu "137th Year aI" Continuous Service 10 Ihe Citizens of Tlllldtgi ColInii'. ThOft ciliRns un crrtainly lit proud Illti r rich heri\ige and thtir kMI fOfUilht in prtirMng a cherished historic landl'l'lirk-thtir caurthow.e. To conclu<k the story 01 tho TaILadt· tP County (()UrlI. il must be noted that SyliQup In TIlliUltp County is lisa consilkml. COIlrt site by the Administrativt Office of COUrll. A courtroom is provided In Iht Talladega County office building locilled at Sylacauga. Tht .rchited for thi' building, which wu conslructed In 1964. was Chirles H. McClulry & Assoc~tts r:J Birmingham. The contractor wu Motts Corutructian Company. Inc. aI" SyliaUj&. which also buill the: IltW Tallidtli CoIInty Judicial Buildi..... The author acknawltdgts tilt work of Betty R. Lasley aI" Sylacaup. ..flo campiled infom'lltion on the: history 01 tho Talladega County CourthauH for tht rededication brochurt of Octobe r 2. 1917 and for tht pamphlet honoring t~ 150th AnnivtfSary aI" the Founding of Ta lladega Caunt~, which was celebraloo April 2, 1982. •

entert<l the building, apo .... d the: offict vaull. and placed tht probate rtcordbookJ in tht fireproof chllmb-er. All of thut records wort saved due to this qukk action. After the fire. the county commission agretd to rebuild tht courthouw, preserving ilIi much of the origi"",l structure is possible. The mlrances on tilt ust and wtsl sidn of Iht buildings wtre tncloHd. Ihul providil\& mo rt n«ded lINICe. RJI. Hunt. &11 ITchitect from (h,t~ submitted the: plans for the courthOUH rntoulian. W.L.. lillie served ilIi eontractor. The county to rebuild tht: courthow.e paid afler tilt 1925 fire. In June 1934, "Mather Nature" struck tht cou rthouse in the form of a light· ning bolt which damaged tilt roof and

S60.ooo

14 1 Janwory t993

wtre named to the N~tion.lll R~giJt~r 01 HiJtone Pl~etl as Iht Talladega. CourthouH Squa~ flillorlc District. The diJlrici Willi laler e~panded to include buildings and appro~ imately four ac~s in Talla\lega', central bwineu area. [,lstQd oIt ... rilll IIown thrir courthouse when the oetds 01 tht ((JUrt sys. tern required modern Ind ulNlndtd flCi!iliu. the cilinn! of Talladega COunty tOnSIT\1ctt4 a new court build· ing. Ind 111-" thtir historic court· house \0 reml ln. The new Tallldtp County Judic~1 Ruilding_ camplmd in 1974. Mitlin J. Lidt of Binningham _ the In:hitect. and MOItI Construc· tion Co. Inc. of Sylacauga was t~ con· tractor. When the courts moved 10 the new judiei.1 building, the county seized an

THE ALABAN" ~WYER

YOUR WORRI ES ARE OVER ........ ALABAMA STAT E BAR ENDO RS ED MAJOR M EDICA L PIAN ,"lit.ble SOLO or to CROUPS .t

PIIENOMENA I. RA TES

AG E

C OV ERA G E

MONTHLY PREMIUM "

• " ••

"''' ,

--."'~

56100

5147.00

MONTHLY PR E MI UM"

)3.00 '"" $

.,~

147.00 $I!JJ)(I

• "". . .nIIabIe ... A,Iabamo.S .... _ Heo. obeo .. ~ ....... _ _ ...,.....1atnIIy"""',ob.... • £/.",10, . ~don ...... . " I ed ·OpdonaI ....temlty b. " . .to • . . . 0l'larl pro_ byCNA, (Con _tIoI c.......Iqr eo.......,)..._ A'by A . M. a-t'... R..,ord,'SertIc.. $tLbIIIq.w Reliability 151 off. .. youfutl Local S. ... I•• with Prompt Clalnu Payments from ..... Atlanta OffIce

CI>edc_.'""'....

--------------------------------------~-------------------........ --------------------Otyl.tlt" zip _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ TeleJII>one _ _ _ __ _ _ lIirthdote _ _ _;;;;;_ ~"

LL.M . ;n

TAXATION

REAL PROPERTY

Corporate, Foreign and program, full or part-

Program includes leasing, construction, taxation, financing, zon ing and planning, in a one-year program, full or

time.

part time.

LL.M .

Estate conccnlratiOfls

available in a one-year

Write or Call: G ra duate Pro&ram in T axa tion University of Miami Sthool of Law

P.O. Box 248087 Coral Gables, FL 33124 Telephone (305) 284-3587

LL.M . ;n

F.Sr ATE PLANNING

Write or Call: Gradu ate Pro&ram in Real Propt'rty, Land Development a nd Fin a n( e La w University of Miami Scllool of Law

P.O. Box 248087 Coral Gables, FL 33124 Telephone (305) 284-3587

Study with many of Ihe

nation's authorities in this nationally- recognized one-

year program. Write or Call: Graduat e Pro&rB m in Estate l>Jannln& Un iversity of Miami Scllool of Law

P.O. Box 248087 Coral Gables, F L 33 124 Telephone (305) 284-5567

JlnUUy 1993 ' 15

Lawyers & Doetors Join Forees Against Abuse by EDWARD M. GEORGE

1 '1 t

•

the Govtrno,', Youth

Conference on Drug Awaren ... hid I t the Montgomery Civic Center Oclomr 26·28, K'Jeral hundred junior high Ind high schoollludtnU WHe inlrodu«d to tho concept of ' Partntl"S in Pm-ention: " stnltgy irwolving lilt

joint , rfHntlltion by"

"'~'Idoctor

tum 01 information about 1M COfIUQutrKU of drug and a1cohollbuse. In particular. thT« groups of apprwimateI~ 200 studentl each htard di Kus.sions by Monlgol1'ltr)' County Ju~nil. Court Refuu Robert Bloitoy Ind Dr. Sind., Morrison ,bout tilt IfiJl, rmdiClll Ind _ilIl of wl»Una: ~. &ilO)' spoke to the studtnts from the point of Yirw of I judici.ll o/focilll lnd mide them IWlU of tIM: Iypu of Ifpl difficult;u which tttn.agen Q,n lulfu itS ~wlt of

.«fda

th. illegal ulag_ of aloohol or ot he r dru g•. 1'0. example, Dailey explained Ihal under Alabama's ju~nil. justic.

I\I\utes, ~rsonl under the Ige of 18 who art convicted 011 j~nik offtllH ~ be subi«ttd. III the discrdion oflhe coort. 10 one or more ofll wiclr ''1rirty of punitive menu rn. rln,inQ from Ur\$UIWMKd probation. to compulsory communily KMce. to intllTttRtion inll jU'Jtnile flCilily until the offenckr nlCh· n Ihe ~ge 0'21. Ban.y made the ItU' dfnh lI war e that undor ctrtain circumstances a juwnil e drug offender <Mr lhe igt of 14 Yn bt Iruted by lhe ci.cuit court ~ lin lIdull offfn<k. lind Knlenud 10 the ... me prison lerm as would an ~ult crimiml corMcted of a similar offense. Dr. Morrison. II J:>o<,rd-cfrtiflfll ilddic· lions spttii.lilt. KIWS os medical dirt(. 10' al the Brad fo .d Alcoholism lnd Chemic,,1 Oeptndency Trtatmenl CenI.r in Pel ham,Alabama. During he. por.

16 1Janw.ry 1993

lion of the joinl preKntations Morrison dl$cusM<l _ 01 the mytm about sui>SlanCt abust. as well IS somt of the signs indicatillllllllot II t«mger is hay. ing I pro/llom with drug, or lI\cohol. Morrison Wlmtd the slI>dtnts not to be fooled by 1M widely·held nOlion 1Il101 "Icohol il I leu dIIngfrOUI subSllInn thiln iIIicil sl.efll1.ugl. Acco.ding to Morrison. nurly one.lIIoll of all automobile acd dents in which leenagers are killed 'nvoln the ust of alcohol. and alcohol abllH- Iw i di.ecl relationship 10 the likolihood thal an Wolosc.ent will ... ffer duth from anolMr Ingic ~nl such as d""''f1ing. suicide Of fin. Morri_ son informed the studentl thllt the mljo.ity of Ihe tetnaS." who are pali.nts 1I1 tM Bndford Ctnltr ar. not being Irtalel1 fo r addiclion 10 illici t drugs. bul alcoholism 0. alcohol abUK probltms.

LawyerlDoctor Education

Team Project The praentations by &il." M>d Mor· rison were eumplu of II mlionwidt prognom ailed tM YwytrlOoctor Edu· clliion Project. The formation of this project wu lim formally announced il the Janw.ry 1990 m«ling of the Amtri· can Bar Associalion by the ,esptctive prtJidents of Ihe ABA ~nd the Amcri",n Mtdi",1 Association. The l.awyer/l)(;l<;tor PrtIject is II community-Iword druQ and lIlcohol Ibuse prtvenli on prog rlm duignfd to rnch young people in grM1 thO"« through 12. In ~rticular. tht project IlIrgets stvenlh·g"ders beauK IWrSOfIS in tlllot ~ group II ... enlering puberty and e ~peri.ncing many physialand .motional clwlgtJ. includ· ing becoming Ius dependent upon pnents and mon de~ndent upon peen a.s

behllvionol role rllCKkls. The u~rlDoctor Project ClIIiI for attomtYS and physicians 10 ~rve iIS the nucleus of a community·band drug ibUR pre~nlion tlfort "..hich ClIn allO include ~ rtici~t ion by Ii.... enforcement agenei". other medinl prole..ionali. busineuu. schools. locial .ervire agencie •• and civic organi.,_ lions. Accordin8 10 tht ABA. tht projecl's plurf: To dis.wniNle to young PfOPlt. and ~ullll who work wilh IMm. luthori~ ti~ and practical informatWn abouttM physlologiCllI. psychological. social and ltgill ~uencu 0( alcoholaoo otMr d",,~;

To str.ngthtn youni PNPI.·, social competencies lIld peer resiSlln« skills in dealing ...ilh life·, plusuru and ~ins; To affect policin in school!. in Ihei r communiliu and Jllie ind local gov· emments. and tnt mtd~; To ~ public: ~"'lV:IIlIld undtrstanding of tM mtdiealllld ~ impli. eatioN of alcohol and other drug UR by young peOjl le; To promote politive alttrnati~ and li/f; Options lor )'00"11 pwpk; To lrain fogures. both adullllind YOUI\II people. in I position to influence o\l..-rs in their school and community;

..,

.cy

To collaborale with OIhtr institutions ind p,artnuships to support uistlng COIT\Pfthtnsivt pmoention prognJnL

Guiding Inumplions From ito; initial stlj/n. tho ~wytr/lIoc tor prevention effort hils bHn guided by the rollowing lSSumptions aboul estabIWliJ\i and ~ing tilt project:

_.----... --,...,--'. ---_.-_ ......

Edw_rtlM .

-"'''''''' .

.-..,..... '-"-

..............

<11 __ fio_ _ _ Co ........ _

••• <IIP

......

..... _

.... , E - - . ... _

,._"' .... """ ., _<11--, . . _ ,

•

TH E ALAIIAMA I.o\WYER

nw ~rtneooip pro.itct can be adapt. ed to ~rtlci~ting lawyt ..·lSId doctors' int ....m and time commitmenlll; Tht putn.nhip·s actlvitiu comple· menl the cur ... nl prewntion tfforu of the school1 iIfld orpniutions in which thqo i~ o,ooIuntrering; The l.twyoer/doctor ~rtnership can ~t an ~ ... mple for building oth~r partner·

The lawyerldoctor teams are presented as positive, professional role models who can talk in a straightforward manner on how young people can channel their energy into positive, productive activities. ships in tilt wne schoollSld other orga. niuticmlldlings; The prevention activiliu the partner· ship UUI do not require ext~nsive p.. ~ration; The prevention ~ctivitits involvo interKtion bet;o..~en )'OIIng 1I00il1t and the l.t\o.")'t./cloctor team: The pI.tn'Tlhip givu clea r no·U" mUSill/u substanliated by valid. p""",n 5OCi~l. psycho!OIIical. legal and medieal ruIOIlI for 1\01 U5ing; and The ta..")'tr/doctor pirtJ\tooip can be wry dftctivt in educating iKlu!llI. SIlff. ~rtI1ts and community kad .... as ~II as 'WOTkinQ dir.cUy with young PfOPle in a ""riety of selling..

Pre\oention Project II nationwide AI the present time. the~ i ... 13 state and 26 ~ommunity lawyer/physician drug prewntion proj.cts btinli conducted throughout Ihe United StaIU. "'hilt mOlt 0( tM JUte lIld local projects i ... beini carried out in school settings. othe...... being conducted in community youth org. niutionl, su~h as Boys Clubs. Ci rls Clubs. juwnile jUitict sys-

te ..... ~nt grou .... lSId socw service lj/encits. ResPQndents to an Allobim~ 8ar Associati on survey on the va rious lawye r/doctor programs havt cit.d lo Vlri.ly of benefits whiC h ne being derived from tilt colllobor.ition bdwttn medieal societies and boor iSSOCiatWnS. Amon g the benefitl most frequently expressed by rupoodento; to the survey are; ioereased di.lIO/lut be~.n medial and Itg~1 , roups: improved workin, rel.tlionships between Ihe mediClI and le,al communitiu: impr~d public i~ of doctors and lawyoers: invol~ ment of m.dka! Ind legal associatiOns In schools and community youth organizations; developmenl ofnet...u\(s with civic ww:e groups. ~rtI1ts and other pro(usional \lfOUps. such II phar_ macists. nurse, lnd I..... enforcement office rs; ~nd gnater insight into t ht reality of how today·, )'001\11 poopl. art affected daily by ot.hers· UR of akohot and other dru~

'rotIPi

Exemplal)' slale and local projects Among s~te and local l.twyer/lloctor drug pr~ntion progriUllS .... hich hlI.~ been desiiOated is nemplary by the American Su Auocilt ion are Ihe Uetroit aar Association·s MELt Team Project. the Maryland Slate B;or Auocia . tion's DoctorlU~r!Teache r Partner· ship Ag.inst Drugs. .nd Ihe Pennsyl""nii 8ar Auoc;ition Young t.wyrrs· Division·s La.wytrlDoctor Edu· Cllion Team Partnership ~in$t Oru, and Alcohol Abu~. The MELL (Medical·Education-Ltgil!uw Enlorumentl Team prOject IIl'IOIwd teams 01 mediCI!. ItgJJ and law enforcement repre"nlitives meeling limul taneOUlly on th ree succeuive w.eks ".. it h ove r 45.000 .t udenu in grades th ree Ih rough eight in all of Delroit's 156 public e~mtn~ry schools. Aft.. the Inil41 meetings. Itllm membe" ~ tIltmselvts 1O.,.,!abt., II mento .. for th. enli ... s.chool yea r for the school. th.y had visited. In addillon to meeting with students. fi~ ttlrm met with par.nlllat tM fi~ rtgion.ll school dillricl offices ... hen th.y dis.cu,"d drug p ....<mUOn lSId di5tribuled '"GI'O\O~ ing Up Dru&-r rte: A Parenls· Guide to Prevention" .• U.S. Uepartmenl of Edu· ClItion pub lication. January 1993 / 17

In M;.ry\.l.nd, the sut, tIlIr O»QCiatioo Iw joined forcq wilh lhe Medial mil Surgial Pacully 0( Marylllnd 10 und Inrns oIliW)'l'n lIAd docton into .......t 01 M.lrywl(h 213 middlt ochooh whue the leam ITlmIbtn 11M: spoken to nuT· Iy 20.000 _nth grWtFS on the <Tali· tics of drug lIbuu and its nlat.d problems. The I1SBA partnership project wu coordinated wilh Ihe stale's drull . duclltion and prevention lnltla Ilvu and hu involved Ol hu Civic group,. Including a local Rotary Club, bar O»QCi.1tlon and ...wial society. In Penr'U)'lvan;", the sUI. bar ;woe ... too', Voung UoW)'l'rs' Division', Medi · cologieal Commilltt lind the Pennsylvlnill M.dical Auotilliion's Younll Ph ysician', Section form.d ~Idoctor educ.ation Iwns to spulc to dusts II Ptnnsylnnill middle schools II wdills 10 Olher groups youths ~n the agn nine mil 13. The ROIl ol the Penruylvanil project is 10 engiie .. cIoleKent child<Tn in fra.nk Ind mtlningful discu$lions about the dangers ol drug and alcohol abuse. Each of th. three pTojects describlod

IiIo'M i. designed to gi .... prxtic.al. upto-dite, ftliable mil iClual cast history infomulion on the health dangers and

lel,1 risks of drulland .. leohol abust. Th. lawyt,/doo:to. turns aft presented as POSitiw, professional role models who an ulk in a stra.ightfo""·ard mann~r on

HEALTH CARE AUDITORS, IHC.

I-IC:: ~ I

MFDICAl/DENfAL MAlPRACOCE EXPER IS • CRATlSMEDICAL TEAM PREVlEWOFYOUR CASE: Nt kI~""""''' tOI*in ,.,. 0eIInr a ....lIon, t;abiIiIy >nd lwttch!J in ~ of art • GRATIS CLINICAL CONFERENCES: 'l'ollWl ~ tab !'I" "'" ill' lW\', "-gh

ad'It2It .. lnllftlhalyourdinbl m,..'\edct ~CtIn\_oo1thou/s. "'1h&II\ltbru~ e!!!i!!! t ClIO fYIdtn<a no mnII, or H<'01IS:OI1on ~ pool

• GRATIS ClJl'Io'ICAL REPRESEM'ATIVES TO VOUR

0fFl0:: ....., . . . . .

• CRATIS, DETA11£D. WJUTTl:N REPORTS: ShJuId IQIIO \It.....nr,.fi,..,... lind .... l"" ~ ... IhaII bt pbfd .. tn. I d!bUed ..,n. • HCAl BNk FU I, .27S. V.1rKw no _ _ !5!11 ct..1D purMft<qlG'l'.-t· .. 1Dr1lB 6bYIL SOrftiftd ......... noboopn:ptnJ, MId "'OMI~'" HO.IiI ... l....,td!mI....a ... t-JnI'Ided~........,IDr .... lIIO .... ~tbt u.s ft ,-....m .... ..,...... JNItnlr. 1Dr hodo plaid' " .....

( SfAT SfAT AfflDAvrr SERVICE AVAILABLE J HCAl Media.l Utl,_tlon Su pport Team I'aIhIr Sound Co<potaoo CenIor l Co<potaoo em.... I)M, SUllo IIIl iJtorwJlCr,l1or1da 5-1622

18 / JlInuary 1993

Te ltphollt (113) 579-8054 Te l«o pl er(l ll) 573· IW ... lit

pItaoed 10 raM your alb

how youn,

~opl.

un chllnn_1 Ih.i .

mo!'lIY inlo pO$itiw, prOductivt ~tios.

Alabama'. erfort Tht AI~bam~ Slate Har's Committe. on Sui»unct AbUst in Sociel~ has ttk.n on, IS part of il$ plan of action /or 1992· 93, tht gOiI of working ·to.... ard Ih_ impltmentation of ~rlDoctor Edu· ation Tums tooJisten\ with tho guide· lines of the ' Partnmhips in Prewntion' l'ToiII1Im of the Amtric.an Bu Associa· lion in roGPel1llion with the Amtric.an Medial Association: The Commill« ClIrnntly is imutipti"llthe possibility of dtvdopinlland implomtnting I UWyeTlDoc:tor Educ.ation Team Proj«t with lhe usisuna of lhe Mtdial AMo-,iJlion of the State of AlabalTl.l.. Physi· cians and ~ttorn.ys who thin k Ihty might be ;nteusttd in participating ;n such a proj«t should wnbel Commit· tee Chairperson Patricia E. Shantr. who is th. staff attorney for Ih. Alabllmll SUtt ~rd 01 Medial [wnine", H• • mlili"ll iddrw is P,O, !\oJ. 946, Mont· gomery, A!.lb;.mI 3610HI!M6. mil her offIC' telephont numbe r is (205} 242· 4116.

She will usisl interested ~rtitl by PrOYidinll them with information on the tst,blishmtnt of laWyer/doctor edua· tion turns ~nd by helpin, bri"lllog_th· tr lawytrs and doctor, who ,hare. common int.rut in prevention of ado· lescent druQ abu~. _ TilE ALABAMA LAWVER

ALABAMA STATE BAR SECTION MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION To join one or more 5I!(Hons, compll'lc thiS fofm and .niK;n separate chec k<!;

payab~

10 each se<;Tion you wish to join.

' ,me ____________________________________________________________ Firm or Agency ______________________________________________________

Office Address Office location _ _ _ _ ______________________________________________

Office Telcpho'!" Number _____________________________________________________

Ann"",l Dues hw ..... ..................................................•............................•................ ..•......•...S20 Bankruptcy.nd Commetl:ial t/lw ...... _... __ . __ ..................................................................................... $20 SKlion

Admjn~f.llve

Business Toru and Antitrust law ........ ..................... ............................. ..................... ...... ............... ,... $ 15 Communications la w ... ...... ............... ............................ ........... .. ............ " ....... " ...... __ ..................... S IS Corporate Coonsel ____ ................ ,......... ___ .. _. _........................... _........................................................ S30 Corporation. 8an king and 8usiness hw ........................................................................................... .$ I 0 C, im;NI Law ..............................................................................................•............... ____ .. _............... .$ 10 Envi'OOM,oent.\l law ............•........••............. _._ ....••...•••.....•......... ____. ___................................................. .$20 Family Law •••••••••• ___ .. __ .......................................................................................................................SlO

Oil. C as and Mine<allilw .... .. ............... ............................................................................................. S 15 Real I'rQperly. Prob.:ite and T,u" Law ...................................................•.................... ___ ................. ,. .$ 10 Taxation ..•................... _......... ,...................................•.............•. _........................................................S I 5 WorUr's Compensation Law ............................................................................................................. S20 Y"""lI L~' ........................................................................................................_____........................0 TOTAt Mail to: Sections. Alabama State 8a,. P.O. 80. 6 71. ""-<>ntgomtty. AL 36101

9'1...... ,gr.wedi!'ati(H>~

+"'1IJ ,gr.",. DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE DIVISION TRAFAC RECONSTRUCTIONS SCALE MODELS - ANIMATED MOVIES Trallic Aeeide-nl • C,ime $ee-ne ' Struelure ' Fire' Airerelt II It existed il ean 1M built to scali' II il moved il een 1M enlmaled Over IS Ve..-. 01 I'affie reconstf\lClion experienct . COUR T QUALIFIED EXPERTS' POLICE & JAIL PROCEDURES • PRODUCT LIA81l1TY • TRAFFIC RECONSTRUCTIONS - A I RCRAFT - ARSON - TIRE • NO CHARGE FOR CASE REVIEW CALLI (800) 476· 1789 Janwory 1993/ 19

OPINIONS OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL By ROBERT lY. NORRIS, general counsel QUESTION: Can 1 I1lct lhot case on I contingency f« basis? Client's u -husband is far Mhind in

his court-ordered child support. Client wants me to try ~nd collect the child wppOrt but dienl hu no rn(lOey to pay • rnsorW*: altomry's (ft. Client does no! hIYe sufficient information 10 QUK I ~ withholdine ordu to ~ iMued lin Mobile the clitnt an 110 dirKI.ly to Ihe clerk of tht COurt. poy $ 15 and. ~ withhoklina order will M issued if me knows the name and address of hu ex. hw.b<lnd'i emplO)'t. and "" ;., mort

than 30 days in amars).

. .. .

...

Penny Pal'ikel'

F"'-'" 0 - - 0{ PIox........, o{"" v........., '" ~ Sd\ooI '" r..-.

"''''.. '*" _"'~ """;';"

<II

10",[,"''' onJ ott... ",,,,....,"'"

......,.., aJlt,,,,,,.J """""' •. f .. """. iftf""""""'" aboor

"... ....r......"" '"''''',"...a .. ,,",,,,,, r ....., r ........ Vi« PTa","", N_ 8 Auod<o ... I""

sooo n. •.........:1 MDIl. s.,« 118 CoI_""",,, S.C .. 19101 r.ltp/oooot (80J) 799-J622

-20 1Jionu.'l' 1993

ANSWER: You lTIIIy enttr into a contingent fee

.grurnen! \0 collect child suppo rt where 1M client is u!lible to pay. , .... iONblt I ttO'1IqI In on a """,",oolingmt basi$.

DISCUSSION: ContinQtnt Itu h~ve bun con· dtmntd and prohibited in diwr« cases beuuH they ue sun ~s pitting the lawyu's intutsts lI!loinst tho~ of the p;!rtits and 04' socitty. A ftt contingent Ufl()ll tM ~curins of a divorce giVl's "'" lawyer an intertst in diJtouraging Or thwarting reconciliation of the p;!rties. A ftt contingent upon the amount of support or p. .rly ~ltlement has the ume dfect. In .ddition. the lawyer would lit en«(llJTlged to muimize tM Mn(l.mt of iUppot1 or PfOI)trty , ....... rded the dient. ptrh.ps ncrificing tho cHtnt's other intuuts. such u child custody. (Florida Su Prolusion,1 Ethics Cornmitltt. Opinion 81-3. IM7. rel';ucd llISn. TIN Code of ProkWonaI Rapoouibil. il/l of the Al~bI. .... S\J.te Bar in tlfect from 1974 until 1M end of 1990 did not contain a disciplinary rule prohibiting contingent fus in domut ic relations matlers. The Code did contain. howev· fr, an "Ethie.al Consideration" stating that contingent Itt ilTT/mgements in domtstic relations cutlI are mfly juslifitd btaUH 01 "'" human ..,lotionshipS involwd and the unique charlOcter of the proceedings. (Ee 2·21l. Code ofl'tl; fusional RItsporuibilil/l. Al.aboo .... SUtt

Bar). In prior opinions. the Di",iplinary CornmiNion ~ nottd thit "'" enforce· ment of contingent fee contnc\.i in a domestic ..,lations cast posH primarily a qutstion of law nther than One of ethiCi. A fee contract contingent upon the amount of Alimony an attorney

obtains for a ditnt ufl()ll the attorney', procuring a divorce is generally held void as lI!loinst public policy. The major arguments in support of this position are tht t hue agrttments gi"e the attorney an interest in avoiding reCOIl· cililltion. RO · 83 · 22, The Alabama LQjt'/ler, July 1983. pS. 2 19. Having noted this tM OiscipliNry Commiuion concluded th.at: · Once , (iNI dtcrtt of divoru hu bun tnttrtd ' ..... rdinS aliroony indfor child support, tilt coIltctioo of arrear· aQ~S concuning the "me would not discouragt reconciliation. promolt divorce and. thenfort. ,,;,mIt"'" publie poli,y aSainlt the destruction of m.l.ni~s. Furthumon. 1M rntchaniCi of reducing ~n order for child ,uppOrt and/or ~Iimon~ to judgment and pro· cudine to collect the same would not appear to involVl' 'tht human nlationsllips' or ·tllt unique char~te r of the procttdings' nfemd to in Ethical Con· .idtratiO)n 2·20." Supro 219. In subHquent opinions. the Di",ipliNI'JI Commission held th.at a Iawyotr could accept nprtstntation in, pattrnity action on I conting,nt fet bas's (RO·87· 961 and wuld nprtstnt i wife on iI contin~nt Itt buis in an ..ction ~eklng money dam.l.gu for breacll of ~n antenuptial <;()ntract. (RO-88-I03). Rule "S(d) of the Alabama Rules of Profeuional Conduct, which be<~me effective Janu~ry L 1991. prohibi ts a contini/ent ftc in i domestic relations mltter thlt Is contingent upon the 1I11OIJnt oI"liroony, support or property setlltmtnt. This language i. broader than the.,."uage ~taintd in EC 2·20 and ~tains no specifK uuption. The rule moil u follows: "(dl A ~ shall not mter into an agreement IOf, ch.a~, Of coIltct: (I) Any ftc in a dorMstic relations matter. the payment or amount of which is contingent upon the HCUring of a di'XIrce or upon the ~mount of Alimony or support, or property Httle· ment in lieu thtrtof:

Tht piYObl crun liol'l htrt ;, whe~r Ihi. br~dly rnlricliW; I)nguage prohibiu contingent ftt Igrttmtn t, in child support aslS undtr Iny circum· stancn. Clearly. il would prohibit con· linQenl Ins in Ihe initi l l divorce prOCwlinQ whert tIw: ITIlrri;qj. is term;. !\Itte! and proprrty and Wl'I'JOrt maUel'J Irt RUled. At 10st one jurisdiction has ruled that a conlingenl fee may be charged for collecling .. judgmenl for alimony entered in another state. The theol')' of thi. decision is that the prohibit ion &giinst charging contingent fen in domestic rtilltions mailers dou not Ipply MClun the court had already as«rl.lined the amount oIllimony MId lhoe rtpruenilltion is limiltd to colltct· ing an existing judgmml. (Opinion 9(1. 98 lundate dl. Committe. on Legal ~thics ;md Professional RUPOl15;hility 01 t he Pe nnsylnnii Ibr Auocialion ). Under thoe old ruiu. although, lhoe Disci· pliniry Commiuion of the AI .. bam .. SIIte Bar in Ethics Opinion 170 used

, imilar ntion .. le in , ellf involving ,rru,*, oIunPl'id child support. Tht Commission 'IlIttd, "Althoujjh the proceeding originated u a domestic rela· lions maller, once t he aHuraQes of child s uppo rt wen nduced to judg· ment, the collection of Ihe u me ''''is ~OI/OUS to tho o;ollKlion oIlny other il'ldtbttdness. • Thtrt are sewral rusons klr cootinu· ini Ihis ralionait in our interprellliion 01 new rule 1.5{d), First. where the client cannot afford to ~ .. n:asonable attomeis fee, a strict application of thoe rolf: would df:ny ~ dient thoe benefits 011$1 Tt-prcsenllotior\. In this situation, I continient fee Uringement would RMi lhoe dnirablf: PUrpoK of ensuring lhit lhoe party wilh ItSKr (maIlS is ~le 10 ucun: comptlent counsel to protecl that Pl'rty', inlernt and. indirectty. the intemt 01 society. (Opinion 81-3. Flori· dlI Bar Professional Elhia Committee.

_I. Se co nd. Ih. nil. that the rul.

IIlelllClb to itVOid are not praml in this sitlllllion. The marriage has bem tmni· ","ltd and tIw: continl!tnt lee would not givt the I.wyer an inttrUI in discourag· ing or thwart ing r~coneiliation of Ihe Pl'rtiu. Another evil. not prestnl hen:. is that the lawyer may. b«aust of tho contingtnl fee. influence the distribution of PfOPtrty Ic,.•."d J dillribution that fiVOn tho I~r)nd don diSKr. vice to the clienl and the client'. chil· dn:n, Por lhost rtaSC>l\S, it il our vi"" that it would not be ~ violation 01 Rule '-SId) to charge a contingent fee in I ClSt involvini collection of urnrlgn in ullplid child IIIl'I'JOrt. IIIbj«t 10 the /01. lowing cooditions: (I) lhat the fee is fair and reuonable; (2) that the client is indll!tnt and no altt mativt fee am,ngemenl is practical;

(3) then: arc no mtiI\S Iv.li~ to tIw: cl itnl (s imilar to thOR mentioned in )'OIlr qurstion) to coIlKI lhoe arrtlragt . •

Traffic Accident Reconstruction ANSA

L£EGtA~A

Ant""U ' _ " " ...............

...u_

r.c.

ALBERT MEDINA

AMI leo 0iD0a. P\uo ......... "" ~ Ofioo hot

_.........._.................. _._........_---.. -._. no. _211

-.-

2I1Zo.-u.~

. , . . . . . - AIol>o.a lSlOS

....

( roo IUd loour "" In rile TRIAL

Harry W. Bachus, Jr.

~IM. pubJiMo«J by iU&OtMlion

01 TrW U..,..,. 01 AIM""-. In WI5hJngIOil. D.C.)

BACHUS & RENFRO

George J, Renfro

PROFESSIONAL lNVESTIGATIONS C IV IL/INSURANCE/ C RIMINAL CASES t' experience. Fee legII. Strvcturll. lr&lranQII1IICIOra. Doeumentation ~:~;;~:~~~~~:\E:~::~~1he inwrance. and COIjlOIale ~ ollef ~

a Field Investigation. a Perwnalln]ury a First & Third Party L1abllily a a Railroad Accidenb (Including F.E.LA) a Tralllc Accidenb a Wltneu location • a Survel1lanc. a Worket$ Compensation a Serriee 01 ProeeH a a Property Damage a Ill$lIrance ClaIm Investigatlonl • On. ~ bItit II S3S.OO per~ fpluJexpenses), )'OIl can not IIIord to pass '" ttria...w:e /of ~~. (III£' CO\'ER 7HI; £NT1Rf; 5OVTHEAST.,

24·HOUR PHONE: (205) 649·5984 T1 IEAU.BAMA LAWYER

P.0.80l( I I!IOO66 MOBILE. ALAS ... M... 366t&-0066

~'AX

Phone:

(205) 649·5886 )~IIlI'Y

1993 121

Reports from IOLTA Grant Recipients

"THE LAW••• SHOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO EVERY MAN AT ALL TIMES" by TIMOTHY A. LEWIS

This is the second in a series highlighting those who have benefited from the Alabama Law Foundation's JOLTA program. efore Ih~ Law s/onds 0

doorkeeper. To Ihis doorlreeper com<!$ Q "'UII from the cow11'll and progs for acimilla"ce 10 Ihe 8ullhe doorkeeper says thai he cannot grant admit_ 1<mCf! all"" mrnnml. The man thinks it

ww.

and Ihen. asks iff", u'ill be alloow in later. '/1 is pwsible, . IInSwers Ihe doorkeep;1r, '/)u/l1ol ollhe moment.' Theu. are difficultks lhe man from Ihe coontrll has IIQI expected 10 """,I; Ihe Law. he thinks. should surel" be ~i61e 01 aI/limes aud 10 werg!)"" .•. • 00<1r

(Kafka, Franz. "Before Ihe Low", in

Franz X"nrll, Tht Comptete Stories, Schocken Boola, 1946.) If there is ~ purpose to public law libra'in, it is embodied in this story. l'ublic law libra,;"" are gateways to the law. Ih rtshnlds \0 be crnssed before enlering lhe h~lIs of justice. Access to tilt l~w is a fund;!mtntal right of ever)' citiz.n of every .tate of the United Stales. and ~n essential elemenl 0{ lhis right is access to lilt sources of the law. This a"e •• is accomplished through public law librari ••. Vet, in Alabama in 1989.lhese doors 10 juslice WItre in disrePili., many literally off their hingu. 0( tho 67 county law librari••. SOmt could 001 afford Iwic legal research malerials, others had lOesf. materials bUl could not afford to supplermnt them, many lacked bouic equipment r.e<:eli/lry for. library,

22 1January 1993

and """t had i~le facilities. Three ~.rs I~ter. thanks to the Alabama Law Foundation ', IOLTA 8ranl program. Illtre is hopt for public law libraries in AI~bama.

In 1987, wh en Ihe supreme courl amended Disciplinary Rule 9-102. tht}' listed as one of the purposes of the IOLTA program, "to help maintain public law librari<.'$." [n making law libraries one of Ihe benef,ciaries of 1m grant pro. gram. bolh the supreme court and Ih. IOLTA Task force recogniK<i tilt impor· tance or legal informalion to the judges and allomeys in Alabama. They also rt<:ognized that by definition. public law librarie' are to se""" the logal information needs of th. average Alabamian. wlltilltr Iht}' be pro ~ liligants. sludent or =u~1 ru .. rcher. Thus, Ih. rearon for helping 10 fund public law libraries is nOI narcissislic. but a lrue desire to make the law .cc~ibl.lo "'' T)'QIlI'. Included in th. lerm "public ta w librari ••- ar.the 67 counly law libraries. eSlablished under Ihe ~uthorilY of Ill. 25·\ for the "un and benefil of the counly and state officials. court syslem and the public." Tht>.. law librari es are principally funded by a library fee assessed as part of the cost of filing a c.lSI: in court. Because lhese fees are lhe only financial supporl for county law libraries. th~ budgets of county law libraries al1' <ltptndenl on the number of m.d in each county causing fund·

ing for law librarin 10 vary with Ih~ amounl of litigalion. Thi. fac\, coupltd wilh rising legallTlllterials costs. and the fact lhal law library fel:s in somr cOUnIi •• ha,'t nol increased in years. caused a fiscal crisis in counly law libraries. Th~ resull WaS the cancellation of ui~l ing subscripl ions and Ihe inability of law librarie. 10 purchase new malerials or invesl in new lechnol~. In 1989. the advenl of Ihe IOLTA granl program began 10 tum around this situation. That year, ten counly law libraries receiwd [OLTA granLs lotaling $50.977.50. This money was used 10 purchase law books, much .....,ded compuler equipmenl. lel.faCSimile machints. CO ROM worksta· lions. ilnd usen t ial items such as photocopie .. and library sh.tving. Since lhat tirm. the taw Foundation has provided Z7 grants to county law libraries to h.lp med the nffil> 01 their users. In ~\onlgomer)' Counly. Ih. law library used an IOLTA granllo purchase video equipment and continuing legal <>duca\ion videotapes 10 be used by local atlorney. and law sludenlS. The HunLsvill.-Madison Counly Law Library. with the help of an IOLTA grant, installed a WESTLAW terminal. as did Ih. Colbert Counly Law Library. In the four years lhe IOLTA program has 'ottn ~warding grants. county law librari •• haw recei''td $277.4%.50, or approximately 9 percenl of lhe all lOLTA funds awarded. TIlE ALABAMA LAWVER

Also included l mong public Il w libraries is the SUprtme court and $Ule law libruy in Montgomtry. In 1990. the , llIU·' oidul and lugtst public 1l1w library beillJl its lIutomation project, tilt ~ls ofwhkh .....,.. to create" compu\· eriud catalog of tm: law library's materi. als. aUlomate ils clerical funclioN . lind provide I publk acctss WESTIAW ter· minal and a CD ROM workstation. TIlt ultimale lim of thi. projed is to net· work the supreme court libury wilh oth« law libmia in the stm. Without t ht htlp of IOlTA g.ants tOlllin, SSol.421.00 oYer a th...,·yu.r period. this project WOIJld ~r h.I~ Iltgun UId. it is

hopo-d. futu .. IOlTA granb will IItlp the pmjm ruth its ulti~t ~L The public: law libmits in Ahlwna lIT fortwllott 10 h.lw i fritnd likt tho: Alabo· ma law Found.ltion. I friend th.l.t is ~ committed ~ tllty lI .. to making tho: law ~iblt t0111 who .. qua! it. •

.. ,--., ... _...

T _ I ...............

-..

......".., _ .... ...._ . . _ _ .. ,t"' ..... (-.

I.' _ .... .-.... ...

_ _ """' ....1fY

/0,

Alabama Tort Law Handbook IMt<ho.rI t.. _ ; , .

'~7T

--... . -

d_ ......... OCOOI' .. . _ OO"....... _ _ _ d ...

BOOK REVIEW by Michdel 1. Roberts lind c~

............

... ~d_ ........ _

,·."",1", ,,,,., I.

s. Cusim.Jno

........ '" IhrAl.oboml5<.>lo 8M o"lIl"'.lCIoCft wiftI., If_ ... c.bdrn. Q"8O')' t.. ~ w.. .odniI.

IIrm 01 f~ ~. Cus.nwnc> "

1tId"'., ..... bu " " _ ond.MptKla. with

f~ K~. CW<I\MO& lfo/:omjJ

I >;. 10 t.. judged by iI. >bil,..,. ., ~in•• Iq.>I ~",oe ""'" be jucIgecI by ito " ..... , ..... 10 the~. The ,I.!.ob.>"" TOO! t_ H . - . ... ,inet! by M.a-i l. Robert<.nd Grqo<Y S. C... i.... no.nd publi>f>ed in 19'.10 by The Mlc~ie Compo ...... 1\0. beeoI out Iooe tnO<.ogh lO ..... e it> ~ '" 1I>o .. or ,ion.. 61 all .... r>dotd>, 11>0 Itt...... ;0 ... ~ <_ibuhO" ., ..... Aa..b.am> btndo ..... boor. A - . _ " ' ..... book;o iIs."...,I..."", ond bmot. Tho book <al\be~ my ............................ '" <....... whoct.;, dN,l<d""""", 10 ....... 11>0 """ ., Iocooe. IPOCoIic 00pic.. The indeo. _.II¥- • ihM:oto_OS .. ......,. boob. likewise" """". . yeo

>,............bout

Wh,1e 11>0 ....... ~. 1mpI... """ "'" boo/< ;0 rnt<dy • fond, ... ooot, 11>0 o\.Jb. "" rOO! 1_ H.Irdio<>I:. ""th .......... ..0... eoo"'"">ta<y. ;0. """" """""""" .......-0. io< 11"IIortrI.-ion. ~ oIfm.n ""celie<>! wI>Itonl'~ ~ion. <learly > CUI """"" mony Ire.· 'i .... whicn met<"l1 .... ,.,. """""ition ri I.w 1oI~ by. ,"i"l ri ci" ' H)n< ... ~. A fOOd uomple;. ..... cl\opoo< on fr><>d. Thew! 66 ~ conu in 11>0 beiI ~'ion on

11>0 IO!>oC '" fr><>d tIu,,,...iter ""' -... One "' ..... ...,.;q.., lear_ "',~ boo/< \011>0 POXl",~ , ' - opf)fn<!le", <"""' 11>0 _ ,.."'" ond

....... _dice.. u'"' "' ..... ~ _._found.. _01 ....a._

IPOCnc.II¥-.1I>o poXlic.. _ _ "',.... '" oM _ impon.Ino - . ............... "'. Wh,Ie..,..,. ......,.... .....,. """"" .... book '" ......... pIo.ur....... '" il. .:me ...... B if . _ ...... "'"" • pIo,no,lI'. Ww,of< tould ",it. • fOOd .,.,. book. III .......... 10 ......

........ ......,..... fOOd """'&hI itIIO ..... pW""ff, ._.11>0 book _ ~

our.;"

mucn dNi~

The Alabama Lawyer.

FRED DAVID GRAY, JR. FOREST DOUGLAS HERRINGTON

""""10:1

oboot 11>0 val"" ri ..... boo/< '" • ~i.II.a""l't'. wf>eoheo- .... inliff '" ~"'. In SUm. ,he >I!.tb.o".. rOO! l.w H.ndIJooO: ;0 ..... r.", ll'Ul;oe ri ."'" wei"" on !001 1_ in Ai.abom.l.nd;. highly ,..,,,,,,,oe.o<ied. MlCI"ooet L. Roboru ..... 1Ap"y S. C... imono 1\0.... rn.ode. v.Wb!e contrQrlion ., 1I>o .. oIt ion. o\.s ", ...,.. '" "~ff' bool" ...._, II ; ' . - l ohM 11>0 ..... _ ..... >hot! on IopI """',..,. de-.I '" ~ ....... rwn "."." _ ""' I:w-r>. ~." .. , ...... w - ... welt __ _ .. _ _ ,.........~..ho"... ...... "hkW • ..,..sbool""'~~'-" II;' "'" """<rIM. Sueh ...... ;ur " " - ' " _ ~ lot ...... oIpto ' 'on. We fIftd '" _

For a list of those making pledges prior to Stptember 26. please Ke previous issues of

1Ap"y C....mono. ... _ _ ..... 1r..11.a..-,.er.;' .. oIo:no in " - P4"'. Th" fact.\ot>e <IiopoI O/"Oy doub!

10 ..... .....,.,. ........ The ....

_led

"""hond '"

Between September 26 and November 30, 1992, the following attorneys made pledg~ to the Alabama State Bar Building Fund. Their names will be included on a wall in the portion of the building listing all contributOI"$. Their pledges are acknowledged with grateful appreciation.

HELENE WARN ER HIBBARD WILLlAM H. MORROW. JR.

• • pub&MoOIIallt.uo:welt . . - .

,,'1._ ......

.. __

.....T7I1C1l K. GRAvn. ~II . 10. ~ .. "' _ _ .... _01 • ...,........... _ , _ .. "" _ _

01 ...... ....:1

DE NNIS M. WR ICIIT

J~n~ry

19931 23

OPENING OF COURT CEREMONY REMARKS BY PARHAM WILLIAMS

October 5, 1992 The following memorial address was given by Parham Williams, Dean of the Cumberland School ofLaw, Samford University, at the Opening of Court Ceremony,

I';) Ii

ay it please the~ Honorable Courts. We ~re gathered here today for two signif,cant purpO~e5 :

One i. \0 participate, as citizens of this state and rIiItion. in the Opening of Court Ceremony for these important appellate courts. This day marks It... beginning of l"'t another term during which these courts win review and nuke ultimate decisions in hundreds of legal mailers affecting the lives 0( people like)lOU and me . I readily confeSli that I am hono •• d- ,md a little .wed-to haw the pri\;lege of s.peaking on this <><:<:asion. For r haw long rtgarded the appellate courts of Alabama as the most effective state appellate courts in the United Slates. By the term -erreclive", I mean three thing5: Inlegrill/.

Competence. Produdivilv.

The judges who comprise the .~ courts ~pitomin those aUributes. The lawyers of our slate-i ndeed the people of Alabama-,"" fortunate 10 have judges of this C/Iliber on the benches of our highest wurts. I am told Ih.l.tthis isliktly the last ()peningofCourt Ceremony to be held in this historic ch.l.mber. Next )'\'ar. the ce~mon)I will lake pl~ in lhe .plendid new Justice Building under con · struction ae!"OM the slreel. Mr. Chief Justice, I h.l.ve one request: When you bocome ensconced in that august temple of justice, pleaso: remember ordinary folk like me' Browsing through the C/Irds in a Hallmark Slore r«enl~. I found a verst that expresses my request perfectly: When ybu'r. in "jam. C/II1 on me. When you're upa tT«. Call on me. And when you win the lottery. Remember who was there. When you were in ajam or up .. tT«! The S<'w~d pulp<."« of our gatheri ng today is to honor the memory of 62 of our colleagues of the bench and bar who have died during the past year. Their lives r. ned the spectrum of our profession: Some were partners in big city law firms: Some ,,~re small-town practitioners; MO$t were men: some "~re women; Some "" re litigators; others h.l.d successful office practices; Som. achieved wealth in tangible form; Others claimed wealth only in the form of family and frien<U. But each one was a hero of our profession. I ust the t.rm "hero" as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes did in 24 1January 1993

"""'y.

hi. famou.. "The Profession of the law: He wrote: "I say to you [who would uphold our profession ) that !IOU must be heroes as well as localists." He then defined "hero" in the original Greek sense of the word: namely. one who is a protoctor of others. "'"hat a wonderfully apt description of those whom we honor today. for in that S<'1Ue they tTUly are herOt$ of our profession. And, in this time of gr... t chall.ng~ to lawyers and the law. ..... nero to ~rnember Justice Holmes' ringing challenge to be heroes and take renewed pride in our profession and in our· selves as lawyers. What are the attributes of a hero of Our profession? In the last two )'\'ars. I have done a number of worluhops for bar associations and for law firms, W{lrkshops in which we explore. as C/Indidly as poMible, the quality 01 professionalism among lawyers. As part of the process. I ask the participants to list thi most important Quali ties which a la"~r should poS5('$$. 1heir responses are invariably consistenl. Ltt"s $« if you agm: "ilh them. Integrity is always ran ked first Then a sense of faimes. . Then courage.

imagination, compatSion. and intelloct. Do you agree with their ranking? I suspect that most of us do. And that we also would agret that theso: attributes are beautifully appropriate descriptions of those whom we memorialize today. The quality of inlegrit!l is undeniably Ihe paramount feature of Ihe good lawyt:r. Integrity enCilmpas.ses both honest~ and ""'tu~ rthical values. values which are the guiding principals of a life lived upon a higher moral plano than that upon which most of us grope and slTUggle. A sense of fairness implies a willingness to exalt that quality of the law which opens her doors to all persons. weak or strong. rich or poor. white or black. of wha!soevtr rdigion. cre;:d Or belief. 1he quality 01 courage is absolutely essential in the makeup of a lawyt:r . The courage to reprutnt unpopul .. client,. to espOUS<' cauSes ,,·hich. though legally and morally right. ""'y subjtct the advocate to ridicul. and ostracism. even to eco· nomic retali .. tion or ph\"SiC/iI ,·ioltnc •. There are some among those w. honor today who. as a la~'er or judge, confronted

THE ALABAMA LAWYER

$UCh $iluationl with \IIlW3\'u ing coo,.. and rldelity.

Imagination i,lIIat quality ....... ich distinguishts a IUlly

IIOOd

LaW)'tr from an ordinil'Y one. You know. it is ru~ that an awel. Late court e.trtomments on the permissibte range oh Lawyds Imagination in handling and In"guing ~~. But theft II; one Q5t, dttidtd norly 6O)"MS iI&O in our Ioist ...tate 0( Mississippi. The JtyIe 0( the UK is ilxll 1I"IfI"I"IOnbIe: NeI_ ... Blum "Fink. 159 Miss. 372. ill So. 817 (1930). The issue: Whether PLaintiffs ~r had .t~yed too fAr from the fads when he told the jury in clo»i ng argument that. throughout the IrilIl, dtfeMt cou~1 had ll<Nn "striking at the plIintitr. this wife and mothtr.like a viperous SNM: In deciding thaI lhe chancteriutlon of his opponent wu permissible. the supreme court had this to A)' ilbout the rang. 01'1 La ...)'tr·s imagination in fr.uninQ an argument: "Counsel may draw upon literaturt. history. science. religion ~nd philosophy for INteriaJ for his argumtnl He may navigate ~I mrs 0( modem literature or Nil the seas of ~ncient Ie.o.m. ing; he may oplare ~I the $hora of thou&ht and apenente; he /NY. if t.. will.llJ«, It-.. wings of the morning and fly not only 10 lhe utlermo:r.t parts of the sn but to the outer rexhu 01 space in starch of ill ustrations. simi les and metaphors 10 adorn his argument. He may rtaCh the supr!"'" heights of altairlible eloqut~. soar into the tmpyrean peaks where his INdow may fall on the highest mountain lop. ill It.. e.JgIe in i15 loftint Oight. He may dolt.. It.. common (lCCUrrmct:. 0( lift in the

IWIilimtnts of pOdry and aM: to ~ry nothinas a IWIitation and , name. He may .... uw: of words a rhetorical bouquet that enchanl$ the ur and mesmeriu. the mind. He lNy make the IcaminQ of tt,., 1111$ the servant of his tongue: wt\(w! Mr. Chitf Justice. after widing through lIIat I ha~ re~ respect for those ...·M must hell lhe argumrn15 of iawy!rs! The (("WIlily d 00f!~ dtriva from SOUrus outside OUr me~r store of taltn\l. 11 is the gift we receive. unmerittd from loving families. from the tachings of our !"fligion, from the moviflll of It-.. Holy Spirit within LIS. Finally. int~wllIrmglh connottS I blOld and CIlflSCious knowIfdft d the Law coupled ...ith an optfIlltSS, a willingness to listen. to hear new ldusand new theories of the law. Those whom we hor.or today as heroes of our pro/wkP, p<)$. selstd thue qualities which mark the good lawyer. And. in addition to intellect Ind inttgrity. courage and compassion. Wrmindedness mel irmgiNltion. they dispbytd <110« of (ami. I" churrh and noliotr which marlctd them as superior hUJNIR ~iniJ.

UltilNtely. the.e tourts. the legal profession. the state. i~. ~Il d iii. ~re beller. rroon U$tfuJ, men complete, Maust they 1M<! among us.. andservtd iii weU.

DECEASED ArrORNEYS, OCTOBER 7, 1991 - SEPTEMBER 30, 1992 ~ _ , AiIo .....,obic CIo<tntI!\\IIIioon,\lItoo>d.5<.

I~ ~

\ , ...... 8tacb,

I,......

80...-...-_ 80.".",........ Atobama _ .. _._ .... _.. 8Orml""'""'. ~

W,lIiMn WIryI. II«IIord _..... _ J.,.,.. L. 8«ch. Jr...... ............................. .. ................ J/.lpt •• ~ Dovid Ib> Bu.oon .......... AI>bama -._

___

AobortP• ......,

~. _

RoIptI Leo .........

R...... Atthu.IIun-. _ . _.. _

Co4sdm,~

MnIoIon. ~

.. __ .... 8O.......,..,..~

,\lion R. Camc .... _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ .. _... __ ... _ . _... ~ JOOn E. Clmpbol l _........ .. .. .................. . .. .... .Al......tn... Vir&ini>. Ltwio v.""", Chuwr .............. __ .. .Andaluoia. oUabarna Sttp/wn B. Ctoio1rI>n.5<. 8OrmircNm._ IIobntTImoIIIyCox_ .............. _ \.aim ...... McDonald. 00hIt FlJrloopt. _ OIri>topIwr Hortwll o..;" _ _ _ ~,,.. _ JostpIo _ Scan Dawson ___ ._.. _............. .SaMuboto. ~ Thoma5 Eric Embry. ... ........... ... .......... .. ..... Bi""i"llhotn. AI>bama Riehm! Buloy E..... ""' .. _ .....Annblon. _ Rokrt f ...... Elhortdto 1Ii""""",,",,_

\tidIotdv.... t-., 5<. AI<I D. . - -

--Bi........,....,._ 8;nnirCham._

_ " ...... finnoll ..... _ _ ...... _T..o<·. .. _ . . . . Rob<n Cort,... Garri"", .................. ____ .BirmirCham._ Ptrt)' C. Cel .. " .... _.... _.. Muvin W. Goodwyn, Sr.

hmn E. Hoot. J..

IIobntB.Hotwood.5<.

(1_

.. .................. _8""""'1 ... N.... York .. .... ___ .... ..NtwpQrt IIudI. catilomia Atobama T· ........ _

t1oonoyP. HiII _ _ Rimu ........ _ Joooph AI .... HomsbJ Co4sdm, Alobomo Walkins CooI<.IoIm>Io<I. Sr .................. _......... JoIon".".,...,._

THE Al.IJIAMA UWYER

_It._ sn...._

""in... Quinlon ~I IWpIIKtMomor """"'" ClinlOn Mcc..

•

n>t<>loosa._

William E.or! McCrill'. 11 ...... .. ............._ ......AnriliIon._ fr>nlc J. Martin ........... _ ... ___ ......._._ ...... _... ____ Codsden. AIobomo Ptillam J.Momll ____ .... _ _ _ ~".._....

c.rot-'-'MilIan Gtora< AIbtrt 14ilchtll L..S. - . .

lbinwitlt. -..... Ri~_

c.nu..;u..-.....

r..kanllloy!-.! 14",.,..., C, .., Mortdlol Mu""'" .

f1or<nct. Alabama .. .............................. /OIobi ... "taNm> Alrrtd 14. N.w. Sr . ................................ _...__ ... Birminaham. ~ Donald L. _ _. IIi~.-\labomo It. RondoIph 1'lCt. J.. ~tr, .u.\»rI'IO hirlidd.1JobMoIa FntIk B. Ponono _ A. PIyIar fIimIi....... 1JobMoIa Charta A. .....1111;11. J. .. _ _ _ .. _ _ _ ..... __ .f1or<nct •.oJoborno CIwIa ~"" I Pric< ............ ......................... _... AIlb&mo Jolin Andrtw R.,.,wds. Jr .._. __ ...... _ ...... _ ... __ .II""t>,.;II • . Mabomo E.......' Brinnon SUrcy h... __ .. _ .... ____ 8i ~ AIabamo

I.. 'rri sm..-.

1linnirCham. AIobMIa """" C.cy.-'" - - 'on M,tr>. f1orido JooSUr-.J.. . CuoItnYiI".AIabamo LoMo Bu_ Stofi/M........ .. .... _..... AIabamo Juli ... S. s-nn.J....... .................................. _........ Codsden. ~ JOIN< L. To~... ..Mobi... ...-.. J. .... t....... him flood>. f1orido Rokn B. 1I·~ 1rino

...,. L. s...itII. Sr. IIoIoon Frri ScoIin

)',on,"""'"..

'Iobilo._

SfooI_ ", l iamHotIond Il,IIiams~_ t"",r B. Wyon. J•. _____ .. __ .__ ._______ ..Nat YOft, N.... Vorl<

January 1993 / 25

-ALABAMA

STATE

BAR-

LAWYERS IN THE FAMILY

_Iw Uslif Mil/ttT (1m}. ktil<l1nW eow-(I974}. Hmt7A u.Jif (I!H8)

J«1t Marl;" &iru, Jr. (I!I92) and

ustie (lUI) (IIdnrillN.

.ltd Harli>! &UnI (1953} (admiJlft

lind Arthur

mQI!>tT.II'fI"dh'"," IPId undtJ

and"'I",")

$tiNl N. CTWd {J9!JZJ <md 11'11,,,,, H. 10111$ (ISS'! (.dmflue and

Kal. 8"ld""" Cllmb/. (l992), Willlim! .ionian (;,;m/)k (l9(jl) and HarT, Whileh"d C"mble. ST. (1923) (adm/11ft. "'thrr and grand-

i>roIhn·/n·"""1

£. AnM Sl>ldlo"d, Jr. om) and Ed""" AII,.I Slr/d:l"nd (I !Hi4J («Imill<<""" "'Ihn)

,lpIiJaIt lMons (I!I92) <ItId.lolm A. ()omr flH7) (<>rImilt« and fal'-)

(<lIIIff)

SI~'Ii"i1 V. f ,Uh (1993) ud RrJi<ntM I/. Frith (1987) (admillft

David E. Avu,. IfI (1992) and Jam •• Q. Spon"lr, Jr, (l965)

)Qmu S. Wi/l......., (1991) (adm/II.,.

andwi/,,)

(admill« and laIMr';"'/""')

".HI hwband)

26 1hnllary 1993

CQUrtma, f . IIIIIi<rms (1992) and

TIlE ALABAMA J..I.WYER

-ALABAMA

STATE

BAR-

LAWYERS IN THE FAMILY

R;~".r4

/fo,s1~,

(I"Z) end

Wi/litrm F. IIorIIq (l1U) ("""'1/leu"" "'I/tn}

.....,

J~d,.

los,,,,, S. Hill., (1992), T. , . .. Milk> ~ (1986) arwI Kath 8. Nonmm 11981) (/HIm/II.... cousinJ;)

.Iamt$ ~

Ral"" It'; lIortUbJi. Jr. (1992) tmd Ralph W. IIO""h/f, Sr. (1965) (aJmirle« and (a/lin)

MQurun K./I., 11!)92). Jim " ' _ (1969), f'atrickl KII/I'II 1/981). _JoIm Thompson (1969)

SUrling DrII=uI (1m) IIItd UsI" Smith (198J) (.4miIlN 4I"d

PM/p DIIII SIrJral. Jr. (1!l!I2) """ ,."iIi, DIll. Sq,.sI, Sr.

(1967) (<JdmiII•..,nd

"'INrI

/1. A/IJIiIIM limA 17Iooma 8. AIM,,,,,, (1m). MiJI..... IIimJId Albril· 1M. IV (l98$J. """..w,. Mill..... llamid AlbriIlOl!, 11/ (1961)) /co-tJdmill_ btWh·

~_""Iwr)

Thomes 1M J)()u,/.", JT. (1992), &,IHI", 00/;9/'" Willi"",. (19M) and 8,/on T. Wllllems (19'9) (adm/liN. WI... <tr>d """'''''''.in./aw) T! I ~;

ALABAMA l.AWVER

S.th 8. thompson (I!J!I2} end (IIISJ) (<JdmiI.

11".,,_

, _""'-)

l""miIlN, u,",'" JiJlertmd "nde)

January 1993/ 27

-ALABAMA

STATE

BAR-

LAWYERS IN THE FAMILY

M. W",.,...,., &ilw (1992) and luligc< ChQrI~. R. BUller. h. (1966) (ar!mil/.., ""II fa/hOT!

fkidi Pri"" Harp (1992) /md Jimmk C. 110'1'. Jr, (1991) (odroillN and hu.<b<md)

lA'ell &"net/ McRae (1992) "nd Judge C. Bonnell McRoe (1962)

J. William Col. (l99l) lind J"~ William II. Cot. (1941) (odmillN

LifJMJ LtQlh~" (1980) (odmWu

(admitrN and falher)

amlfather)

andbrolloer)

Sharon "',,'" DMa/1lsoo (1992) and Frank W. Dtmnldwn (1954) (odmi/· I ... and fother)

TimothN Wade Knight (J992). CinlIilllinilJhl (1992) ami Tomm!!

POlrida Anne K/i""fdlflr (/992) and )om•• L. Klinef.lter (/951) (odmitl... ami falher)

28 1January 1993

Edu"",lllill (1967) (CtHldmilleu. falher-m-/fIUI/folher)

C. CloV TorlN!rl. 11/ (1992). Mor, Dixon TcrIwrt Morlif1(J (19lU) and C.I;. TorN". Jr. (19M) (admillf!f!. sU/", and fother)

A. Wad. l.utMrs (1992) "nd M.

THE AI.4.BAMA LAWYt:R

-ALABAMA

STATE

BAR-

LAWYERS IN THE FAMILY

Ria, C

&1I'H!JI (I!J!J2).-J BilII/ C. &rrwy (1966) (odmlll... and fat"")

/1. Lim"" BrtIft'lt. /I (1992) ilouJlon L

Gltd

Broun (1!113) (tHfmmf'r:

<mdlo'her)

5<1",

C. !kmm~1 (lJfl2) anti 17IomaJ M. Semma (1971) (<<1m,). IN tmd husband)

TH£Al.ABAMA LAWYER

.._,

Cff>'Vf' N, Zf)fjhb, (1992), Judge MkiI<Ni E. Zoghbv (1951) and AIu W. ZogItI>, (l!Nl3) f...m.iIlN. IilIM.

Ke ....eth ... Oolrd, (1992) altd Krlsll.4. OooId, (1992) (h"'Hnd <11Id.nh tldmitt_J

Jormu fMrriro¢"" 11<",,1«1 (1m) and RI)$Q Ham/,ll /)Gal' (1912) (1Idmi1'H <md

"""I)

EIi~o

t •• Paschall (1992) and

Chari .. E. T",.~dll. Jr. (/928) (t>JmiIIH tmd gnmdiallwr)

Cina Thomo. (1992) and Chad Wach,,,, (J990) (admillu and

broih""m.w)

N. ~or (J!J84}. Ltw ... E. "-"'" (1m) and.lolm F. fTocIor

(1951) (broth.,. aI/mill •• altd IOIIln)

January 1993/ 29

-ALABAMA

FALL Stacy WI(\( Ad/Irm bmes Edgar Akridge, Jr.

BtlUimin HO'WlIro Albritton

Thomu Bynum Albritton Allison Lynn Alford Laurie Ayers Ames David MichMl Anderson Kathletn Claudia Andel'$Ol1 William Brantley Anderson Robtrt SI,phon AultlTWl Oivid Edward A~ry. III hul AWl Avron JKk Iobrtin Booins, Jr. Juon limes BlIird David Stuart Baker ErnUl William Ball

Mary Elizabeth Barilt Willil/1l Bruce Barr . Jr. RONld Hro« &Int. Jr,

Benndt I..ft Burden Jobry Swm Butty

IlinIbI Dwlll«k Richllrd Michael Btckish. Jr. Emil Erich Bergdoll John Milton Btrgqui5t Kartn Ceekit Baigi Laur«n Catheri~ BinN JodyWaM ll ishop C~n« IILlke David Berman Block IIowHd Elliot IIogIIrd Clrmen Elma Bosch Willillm Holli1lk>stick. III Benjamin MiIlI Bowdm Matthew Wayne Bowden Jdfrey ~II Bolwing Aim« Marie Brandon llouston wier Brown. II Ibll Balke Bryant. 111 Barbara Jannt Sugg Sttphtn JWlU Bumg.Jrntr Palricia ~11 Bur~ Billy Clrpenter Burney. II

TIlE AU.HA..\IA L\WYER

STATE

BAR-

1992 ADMITTEES Clint Wld~ Butler MichHl Warun Butle.

"'l1ioom Crumbly Byrd, II Dav;d Bryson Byrne, 111 loKph Wdch c,.w, Cynthioo Moort ~Ihoun

KrUll A1ltn ~ AlIOOn MigltlAA'Iling Lft A11m Dubois [Mm uigh Dunnina H(lW;lrd Wayne Ea.!

A1lyson Ltigh Edwards Ri chard Randolph £dward$

David Hall Carter David Michael Carter Rodnt)' Reed Cite Sttphtn DougIu Christ~ Lft Brim Chunn Jay Harvey elarlt Patric:k roN C\.I.rk Richl.rd soon Clark

Lul~ Sturdivant Ennis Cheryl Denis< Eubank> Ci .... Marie Fichter ...Werid YIlt finch. Jr. John Mich.o..l Findltr Bafl)' JoKph Fisher

Ed.... in BroI»ton C~rdon James Paul Clin!(ln St~n 1.(. Cochrun John Willioun Colt l udndi Pittman Col~ [)arin Wi)'m CoIlitr Ktlly Ann Collins ~n 0wi"IIJ Collinson l..is.l. Ann Coptlind CoruIMKe Elir.abeth Cox Ki m AII)'SOIl Craddock Sara Nell Creed Brmt Lindley Crumpton Michael Lawrence Cumpton Paii/t ~ D.l...u Thomis Andrew Davis Patricia Dunn lklTl(l5 Terry I..ft Oempit)' Sterling LanitT lkl'lolTlllS Ann Slell;. Oefl.ia Joyce louise Dietun Ralph Laurtl'Kt Dill. IV Kimberly 00bbf·1bmey Courtney Lmore Dod.ge: ShlIron Annt Oonald5on Jotl Frank i)o)n'()h Thomas I..ft Dougl». Jr. David HIoITlili Dowdy Ktnntlh Aillen J)oo.,.'dy

Cilbtrt LaI"OM' l'ont(1l()( Patricia Ann Fo,d .;ric l)ouglM Fr;mz Sterling Vemard Frith I'\oy<.Illtno.ra ~inu Katt Baldl<-in ~mble Kimbtrly Beth GIKs Eliulxth M<Xm' Cobon Helm Ann Coodntr John Mark Gralwn Twala Michelle Grant Victor Benjamin Griffin Sllti Brab~r Gwinn Connit Jill Hall [)avid Baker Hall 1l1l"'Y Pluton Hill. II July L1i~ HllrMr JlmQ Darrington HloITllett David RONld Hanbury Cregory P10yd lbo.ley Anthony Cameron Harlow Heidi Price Harp Jllrnu Frffitrid: lIilrrington Mllrit lIilltry Hue! WillilolTl Harrison Htdrick Strvm K~ilh Herndon Ronald Alford Herrington. Jr. Charles IkmItrd HQ$ St~n Anthony HiggiN

L.1rry Bill Eliason

Jan ....ry 1993 / 3 1

-ALABAMA

FALL

STATE

BAR-

1992 ADMITTEES

Clto," Victori, Hill JerI)' Dun Hillman Ltigh Anne Hodg~

ChrislopMr Ralph Jonts tl:ukiru WitiialTl$ Jon..

Anthony Michatl Hoffman

Susan Oooovan JOSfy

Anthony Nicholas Lawrera, 111

Ashlty Mill,. Iiolbrook William Knil/hl Holbrook Cynthi.ro Anne HoIW1d l« Muwtlliloilis Christophtr Robert Hood J~ Andmoo Hoowr RlIphyW,j'TIC Hornsby, J•• Richard frttllWl Itorllry Sl~rt Lton II()WjTd Brian I'loull-lawell

Alan Parish Judge Jill l ute Kult John Patrick~. Jr. Mioumll CI)'t Ktlley William fnnklin Keilty, Jr. Jo$tph Robfrt Kemp KvoIJ_Kemp

Anthony Wade Lnthen Iklty Bobbitt La Rib ~y lAtt Tho:In\a$ Mit'-I t.r..Q;

F~y

Robert Christopmr King

Richlordosn 11Q\'.'e1l

Charles Dennis Hughes Jan~ Lynn ffshin Donald Randolph Jamu. Jr. Paul McCu JIUT'IeS. Jr. 1hornu Alln Jfflnings Anthony Boggs Johnson Ymir Co!f,IlWl Jol1l>$O<l Mic:hHlltuah Johnson I'loul Whiuon.lohouon Yolindl NfYftl Johnson

FALL

Mich~,1

Y II«> JOlin. Jr.

Jamu IQybum Ktnnamrr Anilil bile Kimbrell

Jooathln Noel King Kyle I.te Kinnry ArTlO$ J,ortnzo Kirkpatrick Robfrt Arthur Kirk5ty Val.ri. llItrUl. Kisor Jim Charles Klew« P"lricil Anr"lt Klinefflter (inlt. Hill Knight Tlmotill' W~ Knight Timothy /obrti" Knopa. Ann Monia Kouulh

1992 BAR EXAM

STATISTICS OF INTEREST Number sitling /or exam ........................ ,........................... "" ........... 444 Numbtr certified to Alabama Supreme C<)Urt .................................. 320 eenification rate ....................................................................n percent

CERTIFICATION PERCENTAGES: Unl"nSl~' of Alabama ........................................................ ,.. 92

percent CumbtrLand School of ......'.................................................... 77 percent Bimllnghlm School of Law ...................................................36 per,ent J~ I.aw Institutt ................................................................ 15 percent Milu College of Law .................................. ,............... " .......... ,0 perrenl

32 1January 1993

Christophrr I_nn« Kotlkt Thomas G,F, Land!)' I'~ul

Kenneth l.avelle

Kenneth Jamu Lay

Y@;""Di«Uneberry

John .IoMph IJO)'II Lar!)' Stephen Logsdon F.a.le W,'ter Long,IV N,II1aoche Wilkinson Lowery David Joseph Maloney Milton And.ew Mantler T.KY l.t~nn MarlO'l'>'e D,vid Paul Martin Robert Lester Martin,llI KfYin Fm1cis JoWttrson I)Qnfli Kidd McCay Randall oms McCWIahan James Will;"" McCLaughn Thonw Scott McCrath JoMn /okCb.in MeK« J.nnifer B)'t1'J McLeod Inffen Todd Md.,uOjl Carey flonnett MeRK Michelle Anne Meurer Charlulvor Middleton John Hamilton Mighonico Jeffrey Scott Miller Joseph StUlrt Miller Manila Leslit Miller Dorolyn Ewlyn Molle. RicNrd ilunley Monk, 111 Do.l Grady Moore, 111 CrtliOrY Keith Morgan Stbrffli RtlOO)'lI Moten Tammy Denise Mountain Muk l>.Jvid Mullins Camll James Ogden

THE ALABAMA ~WYER

-ALABAMA

FALL Apsilah Cet. Owens l.ne William 0-.... Jr. 1>bova Joyce Owtns Alison Lyn Padgett Jam.. /ob(Leod Park ... Jr. Eliza Ut Paschall Tina DeniSo!; Patrick S>rntltl Dondson Paynt. Paul Sttphm Putross Anib.l.ouist Pukins

Gil.. Gilpin Pukins Michael Kirk I'eny John Fmkrkk Pilati N"thuJ t:dwin I'roItr Teral. EbiM I'ouM llIornas MaMaU ~U Will iam Virgil Powell. Jr. J.fftry TnviJ Poynor Barry D.rlton Print

l.;ou ... Ellison Proctor Randall Owl Quarks \.Qrl Mallttte Quigley Jill Olivia Radwin Matthew Doyle Ram..t)' Cho.rlu Clayton Ratcliff Thomas CIworlu lbwIings JamtS Robtrt Rttvn, Jr. K<lthtriM Ltigh R<')'OOlds Julie K<lthlttn Robberson Christi."ln Edward Roberson John Uoyd Robtrts Pamela PatTi« Robioson Thomas Mkhatl Rockwell Carl Jame, Ror.cagliont, Jr, Richard Rockwell Rosenthal NeiIM.B. R~ Lft Autin. Rudolph Arldrew John RUlens Bradley I'aul Ryder Scott Meyen Salter Philip King Stay Philip IMlt Stgrut. Jr. .san. Cook Stmmr:s

llIEALABAMA LAWYER

STATE

BAR-

1992 ADMITTEES Llu Johnson Sharp John Y,C,lIud Shtm~ld Omist StanfOfd Sholtak Amy Mudwn ShUlTllllt

ChriJtophe-. Stott Simmons Nathan Waynt Simms. Jr. Kimberly Hallmark Sklpptr IRtid PhilipSltpiin BeYtrly Ann Smith John Culand Smith

William tamar Smith John Winston Smith T

1I."I\IIk! Van Speegle JtffKY Todd SlUms MIorigy Koba SI.w,,,' &rJh Suzanne Stewart Anne Robinson St rickland t:dwin Anwl Strickland, Jr. l oclcl Sttphm Strohmtytr E4wlord Best Strong Margaret Eliubtth Stutts Robtrt ~ul Taylor Wilmer Ra}' Tharpt GiN \.QlaThonw Mclw.. Blarv;:h Thonw. ,~"""" Ray Charles Thomuon Mary Ilarvin ThompSQn Stth Balfour Thomp$01l Eliubcth Ltlit Thomson ~ KenoyTolbert , Jr. Clement Cby l orbert, III Walquiria Trujillo Minnie Louise Tul\$tall Amok! William U~h, lH Terry Lft Underwood Memlith Van IlOUkn Ami CathtriM Vibbart SlItrrie Marie Vk. Vimn ~ason Vines Rebeca Ann Walhr Roderick Walls Lonnie Anthony W~ington

kllliry tliubtth Watkil\l

Jamrs Fllthe,,," Watkins William Houston W.bstu Thomu [);avid W.. ton, Jr. Mtlissi Wynn We1u1

Lisa Marie Whitt Tino. Iobri.

Whitd>t~

huli Lynn Whitley Smlutl Edwird y,r.ggi .... III

Courtney Fraky Williams Mary Kathleen Williams John CI~fln Wilson Lis.iAnne Wilson Tnli [ltnl "~Ison M.liui c"rol Wimbtrlf)l William Andrew Wing,lI DMli.1 Sertnus Wolte.

&rry Dun Woodham Grorgt: Mic:had Zoghby [d>".70rd I... Zwilling

DECEMBER 1992 ADMITIEES Srotl Patrid<Archtr Mdvin lamIor Bailqo Albert Owtn Orey, III Charlu MacNeill Elmer Warnn Albert flick William Jao;bon Free""" Sabrit G...alyn Gr.wes Corri. Palrici."l Haanschotm Paula Oauglltrt» Kennon lAwis W,mlla... lamIor Billie Boyd Lint. Jr. W~ Stubbltf,dd McNeil Jand Novtnak Cilmerluc ker Simmons Stanley Ikmard SW1Wl.lrth Emily ~pitr Wallttr Eliubtth Camilla Wible Ann Lft Withtr5poon

•

JanlWll l993 / 33

OPPORTUNITIES The fof/owing programs hol.'e Iwen approved by the Alabama Mandalorll Con/inuing Ugal Education Commission for CLE credit. For i1IformatiOli regarding other flI)(lilable approved programs, contact Diane I~e{don. administrative assistant for programs, a/ (205) 269-1515, and a complete eLE calendar will be mailed to /IOU.

JANUARY 14-111

Thu~d.J'

- Saturd.,

MIOWINTER CONFERENCE Birmingham, Wynfrey Hotel ~ TTi;oI '-'Yt1'S .usociation (205) 262.497~ 20-22 WlNInesclay _ Frio,.

22 Frld.,. ALABAMA £VIl)ENCE: WINNINC AT TRIAL (viM.,) BinninQh.am, Civic Ctntu Alabama Sir Institute for eLL Credits: 6.0 (800)627-6514

DAMACES (video) Birminahim. Civic CentH Abb.illlllNr Instituk for CLf Crtdi~

WlmT.R CONFERENCE

6.0

MOTION PRACTICE jvideo) Birminghlom. CMe CentH AJab;,1111 Bar IlI$titute for CLE

Alabama Dill. iel Attorneys AsI.ociation

(800) 627·65 14

TORTS (vidto) Birminglwn. CMe Centt r A1~ au hutilule forCLE Crtdib: 6.0 (800)627-6514

ALABAMA

DO;MENT

EVIDENCE (video)

ASS . BLY SOF ARE

Mobile

AIabmIa IN. Institute lor CLE Crtdib: 6.0 j800I627-6514

$200 each

MOTION PRACTICE (video)

30 Day Money-Back Guarantee Produces d... fIs in 10-15 minutes usin&' simple questior»nd-llIS"'et' ",itb

your "fI'Ord.~ 1IOfIware. Wills. TRIllS. Real E.sta1C. LimilCd PaMc:rships. BlI5incs Ales 100 11

.....

Mobile Alabama Ba. IN titute lor ClE Credits: 6.0 j8(0) 627-6514

IN'""""'

Birmingham l.ormIon Businull Cenler, In<:. Crtdi~ 6.0 (715) 833-3940

HASIC REAL ESTATE lAW

y..w...-lcgoJ.k

Mobile Natio...1 Busine»lnstituie. Inc. Credits: 6.0 {7l5) 835·7909

34 1 J&I1\131')1 1993

Birmingham AlabamII Bir INtilUie for CLf Cmlits: 6.0 j8(0)6Z7-6514

FEBRUARY 1. "rld., ALABAMA APPELlATE PRACTICE Birmingham Bar institute for CLf Credits: 6.0 (800) 621-6514

A1~

25 Thun.ct., LEGAl. ISSUES or PROBLEM COLLECTlOl\'S IN Al.A8A."IA BirmintIWn Nltioru.l Busint» Institute, In<:. C.editl: 6.0 (715) &35·7909 26 "rld., lEGAL ISSUES OF PROBLEM COi.l.ECTIONS IN AIABA..'tA HuniMlit

WORKERS COMPENS.-mON

For InrOl'1Mlioa tall (800) 22 1-2972 ell. 565 or SOl.

62 Whil< SUCCI, NVC lOOI J

V.'QRKERS COMPENSATION

Credi~6.0

(205)2420419 1

doc:umm~

NURSING 1I00-n: lAW Birminghlom Cumbtrl.l.nd Institute for CLE Credits: 6.0 (SOO) 888·7454

j8(0)627·6514

Binning!\lm. Crown Sterling Suiles

formaL Edi! these

29 "rid_,

IN,"",,",

Natioru.l BusinelS INtilutt.lnc. Crtdits: 6.0 j715) 835-79(l9 ADVANCED FAMilY I.o\W

Birminglwn Ahbamlo Bu Institute for CLE Crtdi~6.0

(800) 627·651 4

•

YOUNG LAWYERS' SECTION By SIDNEY lV, JACKSON, III, president Bar adml••lons ceremony

booklet Uj)~ins tho types 01 mponsibil· it)' in 11<'"",..1, the Sl.an<.brd of a-rtc for nealigence, legal ddtnsu to liability and include. the Voluntter ~rvict Act. There are approximately 40 citations to cases in the ~k of the book which ~re helpful to both Ii"")'ers - ' laypersons.. The booklet is (Tn and available Ihrouah ~ CcMmor's 0If1U on Volun. Ittrism. The conlatl person for this booklet is Jeff Johnson, Director, 1] South Uni!)n Street. Montgomery , Alabama 36130.

biggest ever Eliubeth Smithart

uptrtl~

arnngtd

and conducted the fallltlmissions ceremony in MootgolTltry October Z7. 1992. Ow. 300 . dmilttts took port in ~ cuemony, which included add rtlRs by ClnfllCt Small. pruidtnt 0( the Slate Nr, Reggie HlImMf. UKUIM dirtctor 01 tho hor. and immix.. 0( ltv: court of civil • .,peals, court of criminal ""pul.

and the supreme court.

One ollhe highlighu of the ceremony .as Morri. Den of Iht Southern I'I,Mr. ty Uw Cmle •. who 81'" III impmsM and powfrful spuch duri"lliunch. locidtnlly. Den is Wlni", out ..ith mothtr booIc in Feb",;,,),. titltd lIalt on Trial. It is sure to be a buWllu.

SIdrM, W.

[...wyers· Section,

Young Lawyer.' Section publishes guide for volunteers Under tho dim.1ion 01 Ittlth Norman. immediate past pTuidenl of the Young

".ca-on, III

I..lUQ Crum of Moot80mtry h..s produced an outstanding booklet. tntitlN "A Guide to Civil Li;IbililY for AlabamlI VoIUIll~rs..· The 16~ booklet aplaim in laymen's turns the potential liabilities of volunteu organiulions and their volunteers. The

Proposed bylaws

tor the YLS M repOrted a rlitr, Robert Bough of Birmingham is hudil\(j II oommil\H to propose new byl,wl and Quid.linu for Ihe functioning of the Young I..lwytrl ' 5«tion. The proposed drllft is cloR to r.~ Tht r. ....1dnft will be printed in lin upcoming iuut of Alobomo

"'rm.

Lawver mag.ui.w.

•

r-----------------------------------------------, Make Plans Now for Sandestin Seminar II is ntwr 100 (..,Iy 10 r~rvt your condominium 0' room for ~ mnUllI SIIndeslin Semi .... r III lhe Gulf. The seminllr will b-t held May 14 lind ]5, 1993. Sandestin repOrts that the cOfldominiuml Tt Krvtd for the YLS are booking 11l.It. This yw's Km;nar promiKI to b-t one of the but ever. Frank Woodson has rounded up a sttll.i.r range of topics. Hal Wtst has doIW iU1 euellent job of lining up ~ facilities, cocktail ~rtiu, band ~rtitl, buch fun. ttc. As

IW.I.II. there win be an tlabontt rocktaiJ ~rty SIItuT<by night wilh hoB d'OtlNTts ~ by PiUTTliUl, HooI<I, Dulton &; /-Iarsh. Thert will also be a golf and tennis tOUT' .... ment and possibly /I 5· K run. Make YOUT plans now! Fill out this form lind mail to tht address below. Atttn· dees reiist"ing before /-Ian:h I, 1993 will r«ti.,. IIIUbstantilol bruk on ~ cost of ~ Kmi .... r. The rHtrv.o1ion$ dtsk II Sandtstin is 1-800·2n-0802.

Registration Form for Sandestin Seminar M,y 14· 15. 1993 Nlmt __________________________________________________________________________

End,. ch«k for $110 and ml.il to: Alabamo ,'oon, Uwyrn' Smion, do Ilany RagodaJt. T,.U llrer P.O. Box 55127. Birmingham, AlalNoma 35255 L _______________________________________________ ~

TilE AUBAMA LAWYER

JanUllT)l 1993 1 35

ABA's LEGAL TECHNOLOGY RESO E CENTER By M. WAYNE WHEELER

[I I J[

n a recenl trip \0 Chicago. IIlinoi. I had lhe opportunity \0 visit lhe American

Bar Auociation on

North Lake ShQ •• Drive, The ABA i.5 adj."",,1 to NOrlm..oeslern Uni-

"mity Law and Medical School campus in Chicago.l was going \0 be in Chicago and 1 had calted tilt ABA. to make an appointment at the

Resource Cenler. For the members 0( It... bar ",'ho do not know. the Center i. a facility dtsigned \0 acqUllint lawyers with various computer hardware and software. The CtIller has. full-time administratO}T to help with computer problems and delllOJmtrate tilt recent devtlopments in legal-related soft",.... Ca. o! Woodbury. lhe proj«t coordinator, has been a practicing attorney and nfM works full·time lor the Center. Tht best thing about the Center is you do not h.wt to be tomputer-ori· t nted or even "U5t r-friendly" to derive a substantial benefit. Carol can tell from talking with 'lisitors the variOllS I....'tl. of experli~ and is glad to arrange a time for them to examine the computer items she feels are appropriate. For tilt uninitiatfll in the computer field. the technology is moving fa$L Mosl of tho hardware is outdated in IWQ to three years. and the new >Oftware upgrades art coming out daily. The Center is Wolilable to all attome)'$ by calling (312) 9885465. AI500, if you are going to be in Chicago. you need to call Carol and make an appointment to spend the day looki ng at the vanou. items. Tho specific items I was interested in looking.t during my visit were:

document. Now is the day ICI. scanners. " :"" both in ope,.lion and in cost. Scan· n..S and computer-generated fn .re going to be Iht new future for office oporation.

2. CD ROM During the day at Ihe Cenler, I had the opportunity to look and examine the new CD RO~I storage di>cs. These discs are like an old 78 record)'Ou used tose. in jukeboxes. bul tht)' are smaller. thicker and IIOldplaled. Each disc holds million. of bits of permanent storage information. On the CD RO~1s that I examined, contained were lilt entiu Florida Codo on iusl IWQ discs. You operated the system by accessing the indu and then usinS a word search to find ....'erything .Ise in u.. perta.ininglo thai subjectl! is simi~r to WESlUW and its search capaci\),. The system operates on the current logic system and is ""'1' effective. The acce.s time is less than a sewnd. It is my understanding Law and all of its that the State of Georgia has.1I of its Reporters on CO ROM . The beauty of lhe syslem is that you can reduct th. libral")' space and the cosls, plus you do not ha,'e to worry with bulk» books and numerous volumes. The down ,id. is Ihe problem of update,. The CD RO.'! is a "Write one. read many· (WORM) .ystem. Each year. you ha~ to update to gd the late.t information. I assume that the book companies could have some type ofagr«rmnt to allow a trade· in on old CO ROMor maybe just • CO RO~I update disc. Perhaps the most appealing a$pect of the technology is thot i new ~......,..r could got an immediate libral")' as close;lS hu or her computer. Tht possibilities are endlt.s for practical UK.

coo.

3. Mi scella neo us software l. Optical scanner and software The technology is now here and avail.ble for len Ihan $3.000. The scanners are not quite perfect. but the ~fu..'are system creates a ..... isgly horizontal line at e"..'Y point the scanner is ha'iinS trouble reading Ihe documl'nL Then the 500flware a1101'.'S you 10 zoom in on the am and correct the

36 1Janual")' ]993

\\11ile I ..... as in the Center. J TtViewed several different t}'pes of 5oOflware. I looked al time and billing, bankruptcy and ml estate closing. The primal")' problem with all of th. 500ftware I examined was that there were too man~ keystrokes. ~nus and m;s.cellaneous iteml. Plus. tht manuals were complex and unreaWble. None of the systems were easy to use. THE AJ.AIIAMA lAWYER

I would point out to mtmbm aI the bar thit ..- is the timt to hirt computer·friendly bwym.. A frimd 01 miroe in AlLmta told mt: thai their firm onl~ hi res liwyers with computer knowledge, The r.rm's operation consists of sections with om Sl'cretal')' iUld thrtt lawyert with 5)'$I.ems in thtir offius. Each ~r dots his or her """" typing iUld documtnt production. The Sl'CRtary dots the dodds. IIPPIIintmtntJ iUld final proof· ing on dra/\ documtfltJ. The Ko"omics oIlhe rost of hiring htlp and ON u")'tl'S a", ""ch thil tht Ilf:W u")'tl'S have to do their"""" pleading, OOcumentJ, dala /wing and forms. It is I Ilf:W WOI'ld for la")'trs, iUld we all nwl to get on the band\o.'agon.. If )'OU do not UK computers, )'OU Irt behind the times and non'producti"" Only computers ClIn hilndle the documtnl orientation production prilctin thilt llo~rs ITe called upon 10 produce in, rapid nwmer, No lonau can or will our clientJ wail a day or two for documtnlS. The practice demands immedi.ltt production. 1f)'OU havt no uptl'imu, JOIIlt computer uptritr« or /ITt an r:>prrt. the lrip to the Rnolura Cml" is jwt tho thing lor you. CIII tho ABA TedtnoIcigy Cluri~ II (312) 988-5465 and make an ~ntmtflt. They will be glad to hear from )'OU

iI!Id ITt inltmted in the problems being ~-yeTi. Abo, if)'OU hive I modem S)'Slem. tho ABA has I bulletin board Imo...... as ARNNET. You subscribe by calling 1-800-242-6005, c!. ABA •

M,"'o,,,,_ MWavN_··'__ ..... _ _ ............-..

".",. ,

CLE REMINDER 1992 ClE Transcripts were ffl8i1f1don or abou1 Decem ber 1, 1992

A1t ClE credits must have been II8mOOby Ottcember 31, t 992 AI eLE Ifans<:ripts

must be rtlC8iv9dby J.nuary 31, 1993

, .......

hi.r.... 11-......,.,. ponItp ... 1oiPV'~'J'1""

loP .........

.... [..".;, by

Tho t... ""!I'lObtoonj'<U ~ ~ ...... '"~.Crt&.lt.Ao.iIbnI(aN

l'",t6

ynn. 0Ah:. bom .... OlIy..a...l .... ,j....... nb-ror*plo.. k p... ..... ~.-l ..... IOq,I .......

',,0 .

n..0A ............. -.br ............. ...--.. ~oIJo,...d~F*-..

.........u..~

......... ..J ......... k;p-~dn. .......,... 1t.\>.r-eI'by ~J'I'"' q./""""" It.\>tIw. Lot.... OJ.. C1A ....... Co..nt. Moodo fO.Jl,1Wl EI P-. T_

a" T~"'. M.wdo2l5.t21. J9'J3

f,,_ ,.

_ ..J....

THE Al.uJAMA

~WYER

All the best. _CI.1 _ _"""""..J __ _ ~~_..JI"'!I.<_"__o(~_

JltI1I1.- fArllIlIlNnJ

January 1993 137

Enforcing Arbitration Agreements in Alabama:

A DOUBLE STANDARD DILEMMA By STANLEY D. BYNUM and J. DAVID PUGH Introduction

in " o<lll yea .. , much has

been wrinen about the U~ or alternati~

methods (If dispute resolution. On. of the

oldest and best kf'KllO.ll forms of allemati~

dispute resolution is . ,bitratiQn, a

procedure in whkh the parties to a dispute d-.oo.e an arbitrator, Or arbitrators,

\0 conduct a hearing and .endt. a dKi· sion. or award, on the merits. Depending on the agretmenl between the partiu to) the dispute, the arbitrato,'s award may be binding on the partie. Or may be advi· sory only. A binding arbitration award i.

enforceable in court. An advi50!)' or non· bin ding award, although not enforct-

able. may non ethe less result in a settlement if one of the P/lrties Ixoomes

"..,aknf..

ronvincro 01 the relati"" of his case, Or il may have evidentiary value in a subsequent proceeding. Arbitration is oft.n preferred owr liti· gation. Atthough it is not a cure-all for the shortcoming> of litigation, arbitration does how c..tain advantages. While it is not always fast. arbitration is gener· ally concluded faster than litigation. and onty very limited rights of appeal are ava ilable. Lihw ise. i\ is not always cheap. but arbitration is generally less expensive than litigation . Arbi tration

38 1 Janual')' 1993

.1.0 off..s the luxury of informality becau~ arbitrators are not requi red to follow the rules of proxedure and evidence strictly. Additionally. arbitration afford. the parties a pri, 'ate and confidential hearing and award unlike litiga· tion which involves a public trial and.n order which becomes a public rtcord. In litigation. I!Wn when discovery is placed under seal pursuant to a protective order to preserve confidentiality. it is not unprecedented to un.eal all Or part of the di~ry in subse~uent litigation or at the request of some unrelated third party. such as a politkal spedal int..eot group. that argue. it has a right to the information on public pol icy grounds. The privacy of an arbitration a\lOids this problem. The Il\O!It ,·.Iuabl. advantage of arbit ration. hO'o'o·O\· ... may II< the fact that the parties can attempt to choose an arbitrator who has knowledg. of the ~lIi'ral subject matter of the dispute or. at least. familiarity with the business. profession or industry in which the dis· putants are engaged. Par example. arbitration has been very popula r as • dispute resolution procedure in the con· struction industry and in disputes between securities brokers and thei r clien\$. Often. when a di>pute a. is<s out of the perform ance of. construction contract. the resolution of the di$jlute depends on an understanding of a tech· nical factual context requiring knowledge of engineering and construction .

The parties to such a dispute may prefer an arbitrator with knowledge of engineering and construction rather than • judge and jury to whom many of the technical subtlet ies and construction industry standard. may be unfamiliar. Because of the perceived aoh.. ntages of arbitration. parties \0 contracts may sometimes include an arbitration claus< in their contracts mandating the arbitra· tion of disputes. rederal law provides that such agreements may be $pecifically enforced and that any pending litigation of the same di.pute must be stayed. 9 U.S ,C. HI·IS. known as "The Pederal Arbitration Act" {referred to hHe;n .. the "FAA" or tht "Acn. The FAA will apply. however. only if the contract at issue invol,· •• intersl.1lte COmmerCe. 9 U.S.C. §2. On the other hand. the Alaba· ma Code provides that pre·dispute agTffments to arbit rat e may not be spec ific~lIy enforced. Ala. Code 18·1·41 (3) {197S1. So. unless the PAA is fO\lnd to appll'. the ,.., will be no arbitration if one of the parties does not want to arbitrate. In 1986. the Alabama Supreme Court adOpted the reasoning followed in most other jurisdictions providing that evtn the slightest nall' with intersl.1lte COm· merce ........ ufficient to ;n\lOke the appli· cability of the FAA , Ex parte Costa & Head (Atrium). f.ld.. 486 So. 2d 1272 (Ala. ]986), Ccsla & Headwas vj",,-ed as a ~ry positive development by arbitra· tion proponents. and t he opinion brought Alabama law generally in line

THI-: ALABAMA LAWYER

...ith ~ ~ty (/ othtr jurisdictions. Subsequent to the C6sIQ & HNd d«i,ion. however. ~ ~ry troublesome dou· bit 'Iandard apptu, to havt ~evtlOptd with rtgard to tnforcing arbitration clauses. Individwol pl~intiffs or PIIrtie, puaivtd to ha...., bun at I ~rpining d~ta# apPllrmtly h.wt a "favored son" 5latus wilh tilt Ala~n1.I Supreme Court which has held the FAA not appli. cable in cun in which such putlu ..ought to MIid ~itration. At ~ wrc Ii ..... tht Court has not 0'0'ffTU1fd C6s1a & fkod. In r.ct. Ol«a & Ikod wu IItId to control in othtr rtcent CUts nOI involving a "favored 50n" seeking to ~void arbitration. This app,arenl dual JWldard. is diJcUSKd in detail below. Aglftmen tl to Atbitra te

Parties may ",rtt to .ubmit I diSpute to arbitration lIt.r

the dispute has arisen

whrthtr or not ~~_IIIY

pre-dispule agreement 50 10 do. Such pOSI-dispule IlJftmenll; to arbitrate can be sptcifkally enforced. even under Alabama law. A problem may deulop. however. when a dispute ariKI during lhe ptrforml.n« 011 conlQC( contain. ing an ubitrllion clauK if one 01 the PIIrties dots not wish to be boolld by the rontr'llC1~1 arbitration claust. The party de.i r ing a rbitration then hI! two OJIIions. He rNY proettd with ~ arbi· tration and obtain what is. in asmct. I default judement, hoping that it will be enforcuble in court.~. t./I .• the Amtriean Arbitration Association's Construc· tion Indu stry Arb itration Rule 30 proYiding for a huring and l ...... nI in ~ allsen« 011 PIIrty. Altematiwly. he rN}I _k to h.wt the Irbitration lirHmelll specifiully enforced by petilioning a court for an onler compelling ubitration.

The Feden l Atbitntio n Ad

Under Federal Uw. wrilten ag reements to arbit rate future di,putn are .pecifi. cally enforcub le undtr 9 U.S.C. 12. which states: A ...Tilten provision in ...• ton· Iracl evidencing a trans~ction involving commer", to sett le by arbitral ion a controversy then·

111£ AlABAMA LAWYER

after nising out 01 such rontrxt • .• wll be valid. irnwcablt ...nd tnforcuble. save upon 5uch grounds u t~isl at law or in equity lor tho: revocation at ~ contrxt. The FAA. origin .. lly promulgated in 1925. tw bun h.ld to be rentcti~ at the st rong federal policy favorinS tht amleablt resolution 01 disputt5 by arbi· tr.. tion. Stt. '.iI .. Sh.ammlAmtrican £xprr:u. me. tt. McJ.ftIhM. 482 U.S. 220. 107 S. Ct. 2332. 96 L Ed. 2d 185 (1987); MOst5 H. Cone M,morial Hospilal u. MeMJ'1I Comtrvt;tion Corp.. 4&0 U.S. ]. t03 S. Ct. 927. 74 t.. t:d.2d 765 (I9SJ). In MOMS Cone. ~ Supreme Court stat·

"',

Se.:tion 2 is a oong~ionaI d«1a· r.. tion of a liber..1 fedt ral policy favo ring arbitration agre.ment •• ootwithstandi"ll ifly $Iale substan· ti...., or procedurlll policie, to ~ contrary.... The Arbitrlltion Act Hbb!iJhrs thl.1. is a mailer of [N. cral I.. w. any doubu conurning the scope of arbi t rabl e issuts lhould be resolvW In favor of arbi· tration. whether the problem at hand is tho construdion of the contrxt ~ ilKlf or ifI ...It· gatlon of wai....,r. delay. Or .. like defense 10 arbilrability. /Ifo.se5

Cone. 460 U.S. It 24-25.

Tht Act has been oonstrutd so

IJ. in fxl. that results which. on thtir fx •• lTIIoy ..em unlikely ilaVl' nonethe· Ins bun held appropriate givtn t he brond policy under the FAA favoring ilrbilration. For ~mple, in om QH a IWIIt which flJWl«'d ~ c.onstmction 01 a eondominium lJId lilt condominium owntU auociation. ntither of which wrn parties to the underlying construc· tion contr'llC1 betwtm the contr'llC1or and tho: dtvtlOptr. wrrt held subjtct to the arbitrllion cia .... in the construction conlrac\. Dunn Conslr. Co., Inc. ~. Sugar &och Condominium ..woe.. fnI:... 760 F. Supp. 1479 (S.D. Ala. 1991). The claimussertw b)' the ~nk i\I'ld the UK\ci .. tion aglinsllht contraclor wert deemed to be intimately drpendtnt upon lI1d founded upon the underlyinf tonslruction conln<:t, In this context. and given the relationship of the partin combined with the ~nks' assertion of

thin! PIIrty bmtfldary status under tho: construction cont ract. the cou rl held that the b.lnk and the association must arbitrate their claims against the contractor. Another uample of tht uttnt to which ftdtral courts will $IK1ch 10 find an otr«mtnt 10 ilrbitnte or Ihiot issues art arbitrable is MeBro Planning (lI1d DevelOpment Co. v. 'friangle t,'lectriCQI ComIT. Co.. loc.• 741 F.2d 342 (lIth Cir. 1984). In /IIcBro ... contrlC tor wlS requimllo arbit",te its disputes with ~ construc l ion m .. nager even though thore wu 00 written contract betwten the partin. The contractor had I contract with the owne r which required .. rbitralion. TIlt construction ITIIRIle r ~ I similar contract with the owner. Since both contrxts spoIIe in lurru; of tilt perfOrrr'W'l« required b)' uch of tho: parties towards completion of tht same «KI$troclion projtct ~ sioce rach ron· \rid. contained Ml arbitration cla\l$f. the court required tilt parties to arbit .... te (he;r diJputa..

Atbitntion Clauses Alaba m a Llw

Under

The Allb;oma Constitution apres.sly requiru ~ AIabi· ITII legislatu,.. to paiS laws "ntcusary and proper- to providt for th e arbitration of dispute, betwttn ~rtlu. AI ... Canst 184. Mort· (Mr. it lwlllonI been staled thlot it is ~ public paliq 01 AIab.orN to the imiCiblt itlliement of differen",s bel ...un PIIrties by arbitration. LYells v. Mobil~ Countll Boord of Reallon. 387 So. 2d 140. I •• (Ala. 1980) ciling H«1dJq o. khJa Irrsw-imat Co.. 202 Ala. 385,80 So. 466 0918). In contrut to AWwna's pOIiq 01 encooraginllarbit",tion. however. is the oount..""ilinll pOli· cy that pre·dis pute agrtements to arbitnlt are void is an attempt to oust Or deful the jurisdktion 01 AI"~rN's courts to stttit dilrermcts bttwftn PIIr· lies. LYells u. Mobile COUn/1I Board 01 Roollor!. 381 So. 2d at I .... As a result of these countervailing public policin in AlabalTll. arbitration ....... often Ml elusi"'" ... temati...., dispute resolution procedure for AIa~rN parties. at lost prior to CaJla & liNd in 1986. Courts would enforce ubitralion awards alrt~y madt. bul tht)' would not enfoTCt prt-dispute arbitration cl.lusu if

_rag.

JanUiry 1993 / 39

one of the parties to the contract decided it did not wish to arbitrate. A significant change occurred in 1984. howt'wlr. The pre-.oi· ous year, the Alabama Supreme Court had issued a wril of mandamus ordering a trial court to vacate its stay of an action pending arbitration. Ex parle Alabama OX!i(,lffi Co.'. 433 So. Zd 1158 (Ala. 1983). InAlabama Oxwrn. the [ndu.<trial Dr."I· opment Board of Bessemer (the "Board"). the Owner of an air .eparat ion bci[ity. and A[abama O.ygen Company. Inc. ("Alabama Ox)·gen"). the [essee·uw of the facility. had filed a [awsuit agaimt York [nternational ("York"). the supplier of an allegedly defecti~e refrigeration unit installed at the facility. York had signro a contract with Lotepro. the Board's general contractor. The contract betwffn Lotepro and York contained an arbit ration clause. The trial court found that the FAA applied becauu York was from Pennsy[~ania and the refriger· ation package which they supplied had been brought from out·of·state thus supplying the neceS$/lry invoh'ement with interstate commerce. The trial court further found that the Board was bound by the contract executed by its agent Loteprowith York and that A[abama Oxygen was bournl by the same contract by virtue of its third· party beneficiary status under that contract. According[y. the trial court stayed the [it· igation pending arbitration between the parties. The Board and Alabama OX)'gen petitioned for a writ of mandamus which was granted by the Alabama Supreme Court. On certiorari, the United States Supreme Court vacat· ed the Alabama Supreme Court's opinion and remanded with

THE ALABAMA LEGAL SECRETARY'S HANDBOOK

--"--

AN INVALUABLE UW Of1'ICf TOOl. FOR: • • • •

OO~"TAINS

SECRETARIES PARALEGAU; CL£IlICAL SUI'!'ORT A1TORI<EYS

_ NEWLV REVISED _ LAlCST PROCEDURAL ~"A)RMAnON

ON AU.IIAMA PR()("EJ;>UR£S, JSCl.UD1~ MANY FORMS

1N00UDES CHAPTEIlS Q:<I: • L..fGI.L PHRASEOLOGV • TIlE COUlI.TS • WIU-$ AND PROao."re

• CORI'OIlATlONS . DOMESTIC RELATIONS • REALPROi'IillTV • OOMI'\11CJlSlWORD PROCESSING TERMS . BASKRUrrev • cmmtAC"!"S . UNIFORMOOMMERC1ALCODE . NOTAIUALUW • DO·SANDDO."'TS . AND M]JCH MOllE! ~ N""·M ...... $<0 up! T"ninin£ c.:w.. S1'l AAUi lo!<nt\In> SW New M.......... of AAUi (ir pu<~ ....... 6 - ' " 01 pninIJ

$,_ ..

COI>"fACTOII: OII:DER OIRECn..Y IY MJllll'OG A OlEO< (00-1'.30

J ...... Wood, M.s.

~I.S

Hond_ C"'I,m,n

.IIIllIkk<I<J 1t<DCI

Co_ol<. AL .I5f7 I (1M) O J. . -

40 1January 1993

_J TO:

instructions to reconsider the case in light of the Court's recent pronouncements in Soulhland Co'1'. V. Kf'dting, 465 U.s. I, 79 L. Ed. Zd I , [04 S. Ct. S5Z ll984). York In/ernation· 01 v. Alabama Oxygen Co.. 465 U.S. 1016, 104 S. CI. lZOO.79 L. Ed. 2d 668 (1984). In Soulhland, the Court held that state statutes which invalidate arbitration clause. covered by the FAA ",,,re violative of the Supremacy Clause and that the ~'AA cow red all contracts involving inkrstat. commerce. Soulh· land V. Keating, supra. On remand, the Alabama Supreme Court vacated its earlier opinion, denied the petition for ",'rit of mandamus and adopted Justice ~'addox' dissent from the court's earlier opinion. Ex parle Alabama OXygen Company, Inc.. 452 So. 2d 861 (Ala. 1984). TWo years later. the Alabama Supreme Court granted a writ of mandamu.< comJX'lling a trial court to stay court proceed· ings pending arbitration. Ex parle (;wla & Head (Atrium). LId., 4S6 So. 2d 1272 (Ala. 1986). [n (;wla & Hl!(Jd, the QI<"fIer of a const ruction project demanded uhitration of claims against its general contractor. The general cont ractor declined to;> submit to arbitration. prderring instead to litigate the claims. The Alabama Supreme Court found th;!t the QI<'ner was a limited partnership partially com!X>std of limited part· ners from other states. that the general contractor's principal place of busin.., WaJ! Tenn~, that some of the subcontrac· tors either resided Or were inCOrpOrated outside of A[abama, and that materials incorporated into the projtd were manu· factured in states other than A[abama. Based on these find· ings, the Alabama Supreme Court found that the transaction easily met the test then adopted by the court, that is, that the FAA applied if the tran5action had the "slightest n<xu.< with intentate commerce: The Casla & Hl!(Jd decision was viewed quite favorably by propoMnts of arbitration. Most of the other stat.. had, by that time. amended their arbitration statutes to conform ,ub.ltan· tially with the FAA or with the Uniform Arbitration Act. both of which provide for the specific enforcement of arbitration clauses. Both acts implicitly acknowledge that an arbitration clause in a wriUen contract is part and parcel ofth. co!lSl'mu· al agreement beMeen the parties which should be enforced just [ike payment or performance provisions in the same con· tract. In 1989, howt'wlr, the Alabama Supreme Court confused the I~w with its Ex parte Warren decision in which the court adopted a new standard for determining the applicability of the fAA. Ex parle Warrm 548 So. 2d [57 (Ala. [989). uri. denkd. 493 U.S. 998. 110 S. CI. 554. !O7 L. Ed, 2d 550 (1989) . Instead of the "slightest M~US with intmtate commerce" test adopted in Casla & H~ad, the Warren court held that the fAA would only apply, if. "at the time the parties ent~red into the coniract and accepted the arbitration clause. they contemp[ated sub.ltantia[ interstate activity." Ex parle Warrm, 548 So. 2d at 160. No;> other juri..tiction in the country has adopted the subjectiVi: 'state of mind" test applied in Warren. The only authority cited by the A[abama Supreme Court for the new test adopted in Warren was language from a concurring opin· ion to a 1961 decision from the Court of Appeals for the Sec· ond Circuit. Metro Industrial Painting Corp, v, Terminal Construction Co.. 287 F.2d 382, 387 (2d Cir. 1961) (Lumbard. Chief Judge, concurring) CflTt. denied, 368 U.S. 817. 82 S. Ct. THE AlMlAMA lAWYER

31,7 LEd,2d 24 (1% 1), E,~n if tht U~t from the Me/ro Irniw;/riol c:oncUrNn« Wfr, owr followed (for whkh tho~ i~ IK) evidence). then itlw long be,n completely erodN by sut.. sequent United Sb;tu Supreme Court dtcisiooJ which TttOI!. nin the FAA WIIS intended to ippty i5 brOidly u the ~titutiotW dimensions Ii 1M <;OlI'Imtra POW\!r. 'SIw, e.g.• SheanooIAmerictm fjpresf", MacMahon, supra; Swill/and

v. Keating, supra.: Moses Cone, supra. In II'anTII, tho AlabiIIN Supume Court hold tlYt the FAA did not apply 10 m ~utomobil. $ala o;ontBC( btause tho rvw motor ..e:hicle illYl,l/yrd WU llrudy loated in AlalwrIlI mel tho J.lle WU mad!: by m AlabalN dulershlp to an AlwIN rtsi· dent who wu buying it iIS a consumer and not for commercial purposel, ThiJ finding wu reached in 'Piteli II slipub;tioo in the contrKt Imt tho motor whicle had "hordolort [lxenl t ...wling in int...tate commerce and Iw 1rI impact upon interstate rommera." Allhough it iJ ~urtly speculation, tho probable ruwn for tho court's holding in \Varren was recog· niud by Justic. Maddox in his d;mnting OPinion, wilt,.., he .tated:

AI$<), in Cos/a & fleW, potitionrrs <ontend. the t~· tions werelll of a <;ommercial nature between business· men of equal barg;oining strength. whe,..,u in this case, potitionen niue. the purc~n a•• ordin.uy con· sumers rontnding with i largo «If1IO"'tion 10 pun:hiISt i coruwnrr good for fllmily use.

Although the Alabama Supreme Court hld $bled that War,...,., was confined to tho "narrow, factual context" in that case, the Court. nonetheless. applied the Wamm "subjectiw intent

Ii tm partiu" ttll. CRI 'relied that the trllnSllCtion pertained to an trnployment

~mml

which itNoIwd intef"llllte Mia

Ii teLtcommunications rquipmtnt lIId conb;i""d a oownant not to comptle effective in at leiSt three states. In rejtdinQ CRrs argument, the AlabaIN Sup,..,me Court held Imt there was no suff.dent .....us with intersb;te commer« lICIivity ,il' inQ II",""" and H.L FiJller CGnstructjoo Co. /I. Indus/rial ~lapmml Board of 1M TOIIOI of Vinan/, $90 So. 2d 2 18 (Ala. 1991).1 In Fuller (ANu/ru(:/iQn, no quutlon was present, ed iIS to whether inttrstate COmmerCO was involved sinct the parties agreed thlt tho FAA applied. Nonetheless, tm court $Wed il "fell compolLed to point out ill disfavor 0( prtdispute arbitration agreements." lind dtvOted the next _r:al para. graphs to make its point. That the court fell compelled to addrtss the Issue seems to be an implicit TttOI!nition by the court 0( the wuknns 0( W~ and a pon:eivtd need to support Wamm with additional authority kfan the i..... _ again addmsed by the court. After CkmmtJ. It 'weare<! that Alabama's new subj«tive lui Wis firmly ~dopled and that Cos/a & Hf!<Ni was no longer good law. Less than sill month. lator, ~" the Alabama Supreme Court issued Its (IJIinion in M4rus.1nc. 11. $do«a, 598 So. 2d

Ex parle \VanTIl, 548 So. 2d.t 162.

WE SAVE YOUR T IME . ..

Justico Maddox believed the Court had imprOptrly Illtch.d onto this distinctioo, Ind he argued thJ.t CoogrHl did not intend for the lI'I'licalion Ii the FAA to be determinrd 00 a case·by·case analysi! of the rtlati"e bargaining strength 0( the

ameli

partin.ld,

Aft.. 1I1nrm, it appearN Imt ~ lwI .... ndontd the ",Iiihtut nt1!us" tut and hid iMtnd ~.d the Wamm "subjedive intenl 0( the partiu at the time of contrllCling" lell to determine whether Ihe contract involved interstate commerce, Although the W"""", deciJion is ilKOOSiJtent with all otht. jurisdictioN Ihlt hlw addmsed the Wut, the Unit· ed St.ltts Supreme Court dtnied urtiorllri mel the decision 5b;nds. The (IJIinion did, howtwr. hinl thlt it "'-as to be nar· rowly ,orulru,d and stlted thai it applied only to the "narrow factual contut of the (WanTII) case." The IIInrm dtciOOn WU followed s.hoI'Ily thotrtafter by Ex part. CWmmls, 587 SO, Zd 317 (Ala. 1991). In ~LJ, the pb.intiff CcHnmunication. RelQu. cu, lne. ("CRI"), entued into a stock pu",hlse agreement with defendant Clements .... hich providtd Imt CRI would employ Clemenll in fu.-tM.· anc<: 0( ill busin..s 0( selling telecommunications equipment in Ab.banv, Florida mel louisianl., as Wfll is VlInoUS other JtIotel. The agreement lObo contained an lOrbitration clalUt lIId lO rownant on the part 0( CI,ments not to compele with the CRI anywhere wi t hin the statu of Alabama, Flo r ida Or louisiana.. WIltn dilPUtu lIrose bttwHn Citments md CRt CRI I110Ytd to compelarbit ... tion which motion "''II IJInted by the tri,l cou rt , Clements then pttitioned the Allbama Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus ordering the trial court 10 ~tt ill onter, TllEAU.B.AMA ~WYER

LEG A l Reseslell

Naw le,al ..,se.n:h as,;".""" ilavailable .. lItn you _d iI, "'""""[ lilt _si,y of add,na a full'lIme .."",iale .... cleJk .

Willi access '0 the Stolt law UI:nry.nd Wadaw. we proYidc: flSl.nd dYkoenl5efVlCe. Fordeadh .......or\;. c... dell ... informa,iooo to you via CO<tIIII(NI carrino FMtral E>p""s. or FAX.

Flmtll Ltlal R....."'h eun",.., the i.. ues lhorou,hly Ihroulh quahly ~""h. b"d writina and anoIysi$. ra' ......, SJ5.00 per IIo\or, ""ilh a lh~ IIo\or minimum •

Qu,

For Research Assistance contact: S arah K a thryn h rn ell

112 Moore Build ing Montgomery, AL36 I04 C~ II

(205) 27N'))7

...__

1I:>", _ _ '._""~d" .,,--_"~d_"""'

l>o.... b"6d b"6dIll'_"""

JMlUlry 1m I 4 1

1376 (Ala. 1992). 'llw; MIlXUS caK did not involve enlorcement 01 an ubit ratinn clause . Rather , it inV<llved the enlnrcement nf an arbitration award. The QU~ tion on appeal to the Alabama Supreme C4urt was whether the FAA Or the Alabama arbitrat ion statutes applied in the review ci I~ ar!:>itratOr", award. Certain di,pule, had arisen between th. Sciaccas and their cont ractor, Maxus, regarding tlw corulruction of lhe Sdacca', residence in Shelby County. Al abama. The construction contract included the standard form arbitration clause from Ihe Ame rican Institule of r.l Conditioru. 2 'llw; Architect A201 court nnted that the construction contract inV<llwd the purchase and in,tallation of mat erial. and equipment manuf. ctured in different ,tates and ,hipped by common carrier across state Ii ..... , and which ",-ere ordered and paid for .... ing the U.S. mail•. telephones and interstate financial transaction seltl.ment proctduru and inslitutions. Addi_ lional1y, Maxu. and the Sciaccas had established an e1iCrow fund for the pal'" ment of disputed bin ing amnunts. The .scrow agent was a national banking iISSOCiation which had also UK<.! the U.S. mail •. telephone. and inlerslate financi.1 t ransaction settlement proct durts. Accnrdingly. the court found that the interstate commerce requirement was met and that the FAA .ppli~. Interest· ingly. how..ver. the <nurt did not cit. Warren nor attempt to apply Warren's

ee....

II..... ,

subjecti," test. Instead. it applied the

Crula & HMCi slightest ne<us test. Two months after M(1XIlS. the Alabama Supreme Court i.. u ~ d its opinion in €x

parle Brice Building Co.. Inc., 1992 WI. 16506S (Ata. 1992).3 In Brice Building, the general contractor moved to compel arbitration of disputes it had with th~ owner, thel,amora Shrine Temple~· dation. When the trial court refused to compe l arbilratinn, the contractor soughl a writ of mandamus. The writ was gr>nted b~ the Alabam. Supreme Court. primaril~ on the authority 01 Costa & Head. and on the finding that the contract provided for the u.e of building material. Irom ou t -of-. tat e manufacturers and for th~ use fIf an outfIf-,tate suocontractnr. Accordingly. the Cosla & Head "slightest n.. u. with interstate commerce" test was satisfied. and the FAA applied. Tht Zamora Shrine Tempte argued that Warren had implic_ itly overruled Cosla & Head, and that the parti..· subjective intent of substantial interstate activity required by Warren was nOI present in the case. The Alabama Supreme Court rejected this argument and stated: Th. Warren CaSt was upressly addre sse d by this court with regards to its "narrow factual con text. " Implicitly. we have recogniud that the ens/a .tandard. rather than the Warren .tandard. is the appropriate standard to utilize within the factual context of this caK.

I).

Brice Bui/ding, 1992 WI. 165068 (Ala .

~o.&,<un".

1992).

o<_d~ ~..,

.... .......

_~d_

_d t.. .. . _ _ ....... 1o-md

EIfacIIwt. "'.... _

_d . . . . ·

David

"". P\'IJI'.' J 0-0

__ _ d .... ....

~d_

t.. .... . . , _

"'. . -&_-

..... .... ....,dll<-,.,

42 1bnuary 1993

After the Ma;rus and Brice Building opinions. it app<ared that the Warren and Clements deciSions were aberrational Or were no longer going to be followed by the court which expre ssly reaffirmed its 1986 Cosla & Head decision in the Boo Building opinion. But. the Alabama Supreme Court WaS not finished yet. On August 3, 1992. Ihe Cou rt issued its opininn in A J. r an Cool Co.. Inc_v. Randolph. 602 So. 2d 395 (Ala. 1992). In ran Cool. the Alal:>ama Supreme Court affirmed the trial CQurt"s denial nf Taft Coal Compaf1)'·. motion to compel arbitration in an action filed by the leSWf>

aneging tre.pas.ing and nuisance. The plaintiff le.. nrs were individuals who had entered into an ajlrttment with Taft leasing their .urface mining rights on property in W.lker County. Alabama. to Taft. The lease agrttment contained an arbitr.tion claus<:. When the pl. intiffs .ued Taft for trespass and nuisance. Taft moved to compel arbitration and tn stay t~ litigation pending arbitration. An inters t ate commerce nexus app""s to have bun present in raft Cool. Certain of the partie. tn the lease ajlrtement we re not Alabama reSidents. On. of the pa rties tn the leas. agre. ment signed the agreement in Ill inoi., and Tafl had mailed rental payment. tn the out-of-state residents using the U.S. mail •. In its opinion. the court appli ed the "slightest nexus" ttsl citing M/Uus and Cruta & Head. In spite ci the apparent interstate C<lmmerce activity how.:v· er. the court concluded that the facts in Tan Cool did not provide the requir~ nexus with interstate cnmmerce . The Taft Cool opinion is irrteonei lable with M/Uus. The court was appare ntly stretching to find some way to aV<lid the application of the FAA and to C<lm]X'nsale for the seemingly disparate bargaining JI'-lW"r between the plaintiffs ~nd Taft. The holding Stems to be based on Alabama law which states that in rem aCI;ons must be heard in the CQurt with juris<.\ictinn nVl' r the subject prope rty. Ala. Code ~6-3-2 (1975) (providing that actions nf a legal nature for the recnvery of bnd mu.t be enmmenced in th C<lunty where the land is located); Ala. Cndt §35- 11 -220 (1975~ (stating that lien actions must be commenced in the Circuit Cnurt where t~ prnperty i.I situated~. In the case of Tan Cool. the court stat~ that: In the in.tant case . the property that is th e .ubject nf the luse ajlretment i, located in Alabama. and tht .urface mining de1iCribed in the I.... agreement was to be performed in Alabama.

Tan Cool, 60Z So. 2d at 397. Thus, it seems that the Cnurt co:wertly applied ..,me typt of in rem jurisdiction analySis to aV<lid the application of the FAA even though an action for trespass and nuisance it not an action in rem.

THE:ALABA.'1.A LAWYER

The Double Sh.ndmi Dilemma

Now that some of the dust has tempOrarily Htlled. the law in Alabama re'lrding enforcement ofarbitution cblNs is Its$ deM than Ner. In War_ m!. tht dtftn&nt CoIr dtaknhip was I ~Iaware corporation Ind the automobilt that was sold had been duigntd and manufacturtd out-of·state and shipped to Ablwna from out-.o/'·state. The court not only found tMt the Cwlll &: Ikdd ilightut nuus tut was not met. but also adopted I new tut. borr'OWtd from I 28 · yu r-o ld 2nd Circuit Cou rt of Appeals concurrence. which dtptnds on 1M J)lrt~' subjtctiw inttnt ~ 1M timt of contrlCt ing. In C/tme"ll. the employment IjITftmenl II is$ut C(MrnI the tmployee's obligations In multiplt statu and contained a c~nant not to compete whkh wa.. nr.cti", in multiple stitts. Nonethelus. it Wl$ held that inttntatt commerct wa.. not involwd citing 1i0m!n a..luthority. In TIIR Cool. the court did not apply the lubjt<:li", intent of tht parties tut adopted in W(ml'Ol. yet found that ~n the Cwla &: Heod .lightW nuus tut wu not .... t ~n though the dispute wu between ou t-Of'itltt .... rties Ind concuned • mine .. 1 righu Inst which had bun executed by at lust one of tht parties out-of·state. During the Umt period 0( lime that the Warren. Clemen/I . • nd TIIR Coal trilogy of curs ....... dtc:ided. the court also dtcidtd MfWlI and Brice Building. In Maxuslnd Bria Buildi'l9. Ihe court held that the slighlest nu.us with inler' il.te commerce was prtstnt on tht bas;, lhat ~rtain ""'tmali to be UKd in 1M mptcti", construction proitct.s IYd betn brought in from out-of'ltale and shipped by common carritr KTO$S state line. and wert orderod .nd paid for using tht U.S. mails. telephones lnd intemate (;rwoncill tranuction Hltlemen! prt'JUdur~ CltlJly. a dual Ii... of ases has dt\Itloptd cruling I double standard. The holdings art ifftCOneilable in that the interstate commerce nexw I ppelrs to ha"" betn prUl:nt in uch cast. but 1M mults m: inconsisunt.l'lrtits no longer ha", any ctrUin· ty whether their arbitration claU5ts will be tnforced in Alolbama. A common thrud in tht Worren.

CI_nls. and ToR CoD/triloay ;1 In

individUiI plainliff or plaintiffs sttking to avoid arbit rating against a corpora· tion. The arbitration clauses in eilCh of the thru CoISts wtre more or \.on boiler· platt provisions in iiTftnlmts that wtre prolMbly drafted by 1M corporate party (an lutomobile ults invoice in W(ml'Ol. an employment ~gTftmtnl in Oemnus and a mineral in Tafl Coaf). That a pu!lculu clause may not have been txpTtsS!y negotiated is no ru.on 001 to tnforce the c1aUK. ~r. 5.. 1:.,., Comit'(Jl Cruiu U"tf, /"c. u. Shut,. U.S., III S.Ct. 1522. It3 L.Ed.2d 622 (1991) (tnforcing a boilerpl ate forum seltction clause). There was 00 evidence in any of the thr« tIKI that any 0( the sub;Kt ltTft.... ntl hid bfen ntgotiated It Irm's length; therefore. it sums the Alabama Sup remt Court ilpparently ruchtd its decision on a presumption ttat the partiu did not tnjoy equal ~r. pining llre!\llth. ThtH f~Clors should not be UKd a.. I ~is for ~voiding the ~licability of 1M FAA. The liktlihood thit in arbitra t ion clause will be enforced can be incrused with CoIreful contract drafting, however. First the cootQc\ Ihould include I writ· t,n acknowledgement that the .... rtits contemplited intentate activity .t th' time of contracting Ind that the 1jIr«ment involvu interstate commerce. Rather than II simple iWtrtion to thlt tfft<:t. howt\Itr. ont might also iUempt to ducribt how inttrsliU cornrnt'I'U is iIltcted by the tnruaction. For an)'Ont contemplating entering into an agree, ment with a part~ that is likely to tl'}' to avoid arb itration. it;s atso adviSiblt that the prtst~ of 1M .. bitntion cl.111H' in 1M cont Qc\ be specificilly brought to the allention of Ihe ot her .... rty who should then be roqui red to initial the provision separately. thereby acknowl . tdging its inclusion in the contrlct. Although trnose rtcommendations offer no guunt.. that tht clause will be mforctd. they should ctrUinly htlp. Gi",n the current <.Iouble standard. it is impOS.$ible to ~pecula!t what di rection the Alab.i.ma Court will takt ntxt. One Tt<:tnt opinion may provide an india· lion,~. On October 16. 1992. 1M AiabIma Supreme Court tranttd • writ of mandamus ordering the Jeffenon County Circuit Court to decide whether the FAA appli.d to a duputt betwun I

1._

stcuritiu broker MXI ont of ill clients. ex porlt McEllen. So. 2d. '17 ABR 62. 1992 WL 282()43 (Ala .. Oct. 16. 1992). The tr;al court WIS directed to fOllow trno 'slighttll IIU\IS' test ,ittd in Cos/II &: lkrNI and Bria Builditltl. ld at 68. The reCfnt McEII_ opinion bodes wtll fo r the futu re but may not go far tnough. £ven though cert io ra ri was denied in Warnn. it is li kely that. gi""n the right liels. the U.S. Supreme Cou rt would iCCtpt ce rtiorari review of an Alabam;o cast which is dtcidtd contral'}' to the pOlicy of the FAA. Although an argument an be made that tl\:lrnn wa.. pu rely aloal iIC\ion not invol vi ng inttr· l tate commerce. luch In Irgument is not justiflilbit on the facts III Clemmts and TDI/ Cool. boIh 0( which I~ incon· sistent with tilt policy of the FAA. Furthermore. the Warren lubjf(\iw t~st encouriies the party steking to avoid arbitration to fabrinte. after the fact. his al\.ogtd ·state of mind" at the time III cootrKtinC to lvoid the en/ommen! of an unambiguous. written arbitration clause. Rather than cont inuing to be burdened with tht subjectiw. ase·bycast iIFIIiysis 0( whelher 1M partiu coo· templated interstaU activity ~t 1M time of contracting. the AlabarTI.I SUprt"'" Cou rt ihould overrule Wll r ren. Cleme"l~ and Taft Coa/lnd r..(firm Cosla & llead and its PTOIleny.

ENDtroTtS I.

n..._",1IJJJw~"",,0IIItW0n_

doti,_ 10< an wL ... doItd AI.I(w' 16. _ 1~1.

0/ tI>t .....rI .... ,.;!hdnwn.

opinion

Dn""",," _"'* r - _ _. H.L.

"'lin C-u. Co.. hoc. ,. /MouIT..1

I~l WI.

110853 VdL. Ao.4 I, l""~

1. AlA A10 I CmonI ConoIitiotIo.. lU.t _

<on'fOIIf",.'

An';' CI, ;", "hl"I"'1 of 0, ni&ttd Lo tI>t c.., ....... '" .... tI>t,...-. >hill 100 Milled to, ortoit,otioo; irI _ _

"""r.'_

wi'h tI>t CoN.IN<lion I...."" Alt;i,,,,1io<o ...... 0/ lilt _rial; AiMoria·

""'n.:. ,......

and

~"' i

.., ........ _ _

a;n.

an'" ...

S!notd .. ,.,. bnoodt)o Lo fond ...... not _ , ..... ..toibobIo lout .... 10<1 daimi. I<O<h .. It ..... .... dUm> "" ...,.uIiw .......

..... s..~.... M'o'b.; "'" - . . . ~ Ie ~ _ - .

353 (N.1I. ~ IM<ll

hor..

S91'. '-'

3. An .JlllliQlioto"". "hu,i". .... ptndinl in thd ....... of ~t3.1m. •

JanUlI')' 1993 1 43

DISCIPLINARY REPORT R.ln. t.t.....nt

• W.. ltu we Brallan , Jr. was rein. staled to the pr~ctk. of law by order of the Supreme Court of Alabama, erftdive September 28. 1992. (Pet. fl92·()41 s..~nder

of Llcens.

• In an order dated October 2ll. 1992. the Supreme Court of Alabama cancellro and annuned the lic.n~ and priv. ilege of Montgomery at torney Jeo n Ii:ldrl4Ce Holt to practice law in all of the court> in tho ,tate of Alabama, .ffec-

live November 10. 1992. The order of the court was based upon Holt's having voluntarily relinquished and surren·

dered hi,1icense to practice llIw. S...penslons

• Effective September 30. 1992. Birm_ ingham aUo,""l' Willia m Kent Eason has been suspended ••om the practice of law for noncompliance with the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Rules. (elf: No. 92-51) • By order of the Supreme Court of Alabama, dated October 20. 1992. Anniston attorney Un'" MH'rl1l Vardaman "as suspended from the practice of law in the State of AI.m~ma for a period of 90 days, said suspension to become effective Cktobu 30, 1992, Vardaman pled guilt)' in federal court to the mil<ltmeanor offense of failing to pa~ his fedtr al income taxes, Vardaman's suspension WilS b/lsed upon his conviction, pursuant to Rule 221al(21, Alab/lma Rules of Di!.Ciplilldry Procedure, [Rul. 22(aj(2) Pet. 192-061 • Columbus, Georgia lawyer Chari" Cl lffOTd Carter, al.o admitt ed in Alabama, was suspended from the practice of law for a period of three ~ears dfective October 28, 1992, A former client of Ca rter's complained that he bad been advised by other lawyers that the divorce decree obtained for him by Carter contained a number of errors and may not be valid and that Carter would nol respond to his numerous lelephone 44 1January 1993

calls and Itlten, The client was also concerned that Carter was on inacti~ status with Ihe Alab/lma State Bar when the Alabama divorce decHe was obtained, Carter WaS specifically requesled to addre~ the allegation that he did not hold a cur,..,nt Alabama license to practice law_ He did not respond to this request. The records of the Alab~ma State Bar indicate that Carter did not purchase . license to practice law in Alabama from October I , 1990 until December 1, 1991. Pormal charges wue filed April 27, 1992. Carter filed no defensi~ pleadings and a default judgmenl was entered. Aiter a hearing to impose discipline. with Cart.. present pro s.. , the Disciplinary Board su.~nded Carter for a period of three years. (ASS No. 91-595).

Public

R.p~lm.nd.

• f'airhope attorney J allle. Conrael Po,",U was publiel~ reprimandw October 30, 1992 lor violating Rule 1.3 ofth~ Rules of Pmfe,sional Conduct which provides that ~ la"1'er shall not willfully neglect a legal matter entrusted 10 him, and Rule 1.4(.j which requi,..,. that an attorney keep his dient reasonably informed about the status of ~nding legal matters and promptly comply with the clienfs request for information. In January 1988, Powell was employed to represent a client in I fraud and breach of contract claim. After suit was filed, the defendants filed for baokrupt~ and the proceeding was stayed. There· after. the clitnt made re""ated attempts to conhct Powell but he failed o r refused to return the elienrs telephone calls Or to communicate with the di~nt concerning the status of the case. [n AugU$t 1990, Powell represented to his client that the case would likely come up in Octobe r 1990. Prom October 1990 through February 1991. the dient ,..,peatedl~ attempted to contact f>ov,~11 b~ ulephone. but Powell again refused to return the calls. [n November 1990.

the client sent f>ov,~11 a certir.ed letter, which WaS delivered to Powel1". office Dectmber 3 , 1990. Powell failed Or refused to respond to this letter. Thereafter, the client made inquiry of the circuit clerk's ofllet and discovered th.t the stay WilS lifted in March 199(1, and hi> case had been set for trial on May 4. 1990, but th~t his c~ was dismis.sed because of P",,~lI's failure to appear in court on the day of trial. Thereafter, the client attempted again to communicate with f>ov,~11 concerning the outcome of his case, but Powell again failed or refused to return 1M client's telephone calls. The Disciplina ry Commission determined Ihat as discipline for the abo>~ described conduct I'ow<II should recei~. public ,..,primand with general publication. (ASB No. 91-718) • Mobile attornt}' 8.,.ao C_ Duht' was publicly reprimanded on Cktober 30, 1992 for violating Rule l.l of the Ru les of Professional Conduct which provides that a IIW}'tT shall provide competent representation to a client; Rule 1.5 which prohibits an attorney from charging/collecting an excessive fee; and Rule 5.4 which provides that ~ I~r sball not shart legal fe.s with a non-lawye r. [n 1989, Duhe' negotiated a settlement on behalf of his clients. Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Vaughn , unde r the terms of which the Vaughns were to reai~ a 20yeu annuity. Civen the ad-.'aJlced a~ of the Vaughns at the time of the settlemen\. a 2O-year annuit)' was not in their best interest. Purthermore, Duhe' calculated his allorney's fe~s based 00 tht toW amount to be paid out owr the 20year period, rather than reducing Ihe settlement to its present value for purpOst5 of calculating his attorney'. fWi as is required under Alabama law. In addition, the investigation indicated that Duhe' sbam! a portion of his Itts " ith a non -lawyer. The Disciplinary Commission detennined that as discipline for the above...:le!.Cribed conduct. Duhe' should recei"e a public ,..,primand without gen• eral publication, (ASa No. 90-644)

THE AU\BAMA lAWYER

LEGISLATIVE

WRAP-Up

IJg BOB McCURLEY, director; the Alabama Law Institute

IIII

January 1993 he ]993 Regular Susion of the Alabilma l .gis1i!Urt will bqj:in l'unIUY. Ftbru·

Court· drawn plan. Ms. Mar ilyn Terry aerv .. as Rupporlionment Director. and Mr. Olovid Jiord of the ~ firm of BI.Ich & Bingham KMS as CounMI to the Commiltte.

lITY 2. 1993. Filein, the LtS~tu .. i$

a possible tin.ancial crisis which rN}I ... ull from the equity fund· ing lawsuit brought by the AI",bama Coali t ion for Equality in which t he sdlOol boa rds contend the funding of t~ucalion is Ul\C011Jlitution.tl \0 afford

Law In.tlhlte Legislation The Ala~ma Law Institute will pre· sent to th. t~lIillature a rtvilion of the Ala~ma J>r<>OOte Procedure law which

thei r studtnt. an equal .duution to thoR in the mort ilfflutnl countits. f unding of prisons. rnrnW htalth IIId MtdiQ,id abo will bf before tilt ~isl.l· lure. T'he court I)'5tnn got. temporary reprieve from its funding ~ luI ym with the fW5aIte of Act No. 92·:r.!7,

Renovated State capitol Aft.r Krtn yea .. and twenty-eight million dollars of rmov.stion, the Stalt Capital reopentd IAtcembu 12. 1m ~ is nowoptn 10 the public. The CeTllor', office. Lt. Gov.rnor·J Office. Treaturer. Auditor and Stcre tary of Statt I1lOYtd back into the Capital. The Alabama House and Stnate will continue to meet in the Stale House, lind mtmbt., will continue 10 have their offices in til. S~te HOUK. The Attorney (;(nera)'s OffIC<l: will abo CI)n. I,nut to be in the State House. For (urther infoTlllltion contact !:lob Mo:Curky, AlibaITlll Law lrutitute. P.O. Box 1425, Tuscalooslo. Alabama 35486, or all (205) 348-74 I I. •

which provided for a 'me'Yu , supple ·

mental court costs to expire $eptembtr 30, 1993.

- ,,"'. _" ...

n~ ring

the int.rim !)!'.iod bel,,'un ReliulAr SUllons of the Ltgisla,ur. thue t.lon bttn tl~n Joint $tillite HOOK Commilttu otudyi"ll JUb;«ts ;os t l.dion .dorm and the environmtnl that should uport ur!y in tilt suOOn. Co\Iemor Hunt has al50 ~ppoint~d two Ip~ci ll commit!ets: the Tax Rdorm Comm itlte , chai red by Bi rmingham l.Iwytr Tom ~rruthm. and the Ethia Rdo r m Committee, chJired by ~mopoIis lotlorney Rick Manky. The Commiltte most lihly to ~ in tIM: fQftfTl)nt is the peTllllntnt leflim· tive rupportionmtnt comm ittee chooind by Speiktr Pro Tem and !.ow InlHtu!. Pruident Jimn M. Campbell from Anniston. This Committee wu pru~nttd numerous rupportionment planl. Al re~ pending in tIM: Montgomery Circuit Court is a lawsuit cOrICemi"i legislali...., .. apportionment. The lut \rgisJatM mwortioo....nt p~ Pl$Sfd by the ~gis lature ten yeUI ago wu th rown OUI by the Ff(!el"lll Courts after tIM: 1982 ~gislature had al rudy betn elected. Consequently", new election wu held the following year under a THE ALABAMA LAWYER

....

_ L ...e...o...~

.._-....... -~ -~

.... ~aI

.... .-- ...

will Ht forth automatic tltlli .. and pow_ ers of perlonal represenlat ives much like that now found for COl"l5eM\Ors. It will redu ce th e amount of bond required from double tIM: .... Iue of tIM: ..tate to fi"llif: VlIM of the utale. The ~ I..Iw Inslitule upecU to complele in Ihe n rly plIrl of 1993. revision of the l:Ius lne" Corporation Act and a new Limitf(! Liabili!)' Compa· ny Act lsee Alooomo LaWIf'l'. Novem_ ber. 1992). These lhould be introduced durirlfl tIM: lAgi.lati.... su.sion. The uniform Commerciil Coo. Artick 2.\, ·lA~·, ~ Articif: 4A. ' Funds Traru.fers" both !W$oNIlhe Lrgislalure in the Second S9tc~ Snsion in 1!1!12 and both b«lIme eff.ct ..... Jan ..... ry I. 1993. Copies 01 these Acls are included ;n an int.rim supplement publilh~ by Alabama·s C<)dt publishing company. The Michie Company.

NOTICE JU DICIAL AWARD OF MERIT NOMINATIONS DUE MAY 15 lr.. Board 0/ Comm ilSk>ncrs oI tr.. .... lwlTlll Slate B., w il l re.:eive nomi·

nallon. for tho sta,. ba,'s ludiClal .... wwol Met~ lhrnugI. May 15.

Nominations u..,.,kl be p't"p.l.od .ne! mailed to lI.pnald T. H.... nH, 5ec~, _<11 011.0. C... ,. ,,,ujon ........ I,ob,vno ~1. I.or,

r.o. 10. 67 1,

tproe<y, .o..l. :Mol 01F()< I""""", ", details _

IIIe bo ....

anicle on J>08" 9.

Jan ..... ry 1993 / 45

Beware of Tax Liens and the IRS Right of Redemption Mter Foreclosure By GILBERT F DUKES, III

THE FACTS: ~

following facl$ wHi

the w i, for th iJ arlicl~:

K~ lJ

2. Company A fails to pay federal

In ts ~nd the IRS r~c()TdJ 11 Notice of Pedenl Tn Lien on tilt Proptrty.

J. Com pany II r~i!s \0 pay Rank I which then purchasn the Prop· erty at non_judicial foreclosure for S2OO,OOO. •• Company B purchaKs the Prop.

erly from Bink I for its flli, market value of S21(},OOO. 5. The Property is in poor condition and Company B SptM, an additional $250,000 ,elNOi. ing and impnlYirlj lhe Property.

6. With in one yur of Ba nk \', foreclosure. IRS notifies Compa. ny B that it in tends to redeem the Propert y frnm Company B

by payiRJI 5200,000 plus (; pt r· cent in ttru t lind incidental txpl'IUU.

less Iht

rol lonabl. rental value of tht l' rnporty during Company 8' , o....ntrship.2 Accord ing to IRS. the purctwe pritt ,,;11 bf: slight· Iy Q\..r 5200,000. 7, Company 8 il facing a lou of approximately 5260.0001 46 / hnuaryl993

~ Paid" by the IRS:

Company B't a ilemmi begins wi t h 7425(d)(2) of til. Int . .....1Revenue Code and the rq!Ulitions thtreundtr,3 S«tion 3(I1.7425.4(b)(IJ 5b\ts as foIlowl: ~

I. Company II borrows $200,000 from Bank I and rlklrtgagH ;\$ Lind and building (Ihe "Proptr· ty") \0 Bank I. Bank I rtCOrds the mort~e.

lJ\IIintenance

~ The "Amount to be

Min fnWrW/. In any aM in which

district di rector uucius the right to redeem nal property uooer Kdion 7425{d), the amount to bf: [Mid is til. IoUm 0( the follow-

i"ll_nts(I)Thr IIfhllll _mount ,.Id lOT 1M ~II'" being redHmed (.... hich. in the cue of a p"rc~r .... ho is

the holder of the lien being fort · doKd. shall induclt the iIIllOUIlt 0( the obliption IeC!Jrtd by such lim to the utent legally utisfi«l by ruson of the we); (ii)IIlt_

' 011 tht _ _ nl JIflld...

it the Ait by the purdlistr 0( the

ruJ property rompuIed it the Rtt of 6 perctnt pe r annum for the period from Ihe dille of the 1,111 •...10 the dIIte 01 redemption; (iii) T1v amount. If Iny, tC[IW to the UCltft of Wtht ~ 1Ift'. t ll.rlf, l" curNld 10 m,i" ,.i" t uch protwrl¥ ... by the pUrctwtr (a nd hit lucce""r in interett, if any) ove r (BI the income frnm wch property ruJiud by the pUr· cI1Qer (and his s....ctuOr in inltr· ~. if any) plus 1I rusooablt Il'n~ vilue of tuch property (to the extent the property is used by or with the <:On$tnt of the pUrctwtr

or his successor in int.rtst or is renttd at Itu tlwl its r~1t rm~ v.tl ... ); and (iv) Wilh ll',peeI to i redemption

made after ~ctmber 31. 1976. tilt lImount. if illy. oi l fMymi'll1 ma.dt by the purchutr or his suc«uor in intt""" ol'kr the lO«ciosure SolIe to a holder of I nnior li.n .... " (.mpilasisaddtd) The starting pOint in ta1tulating the -llmount 10 be [Mlct by the IRS seems 10 be the $200.000 Bank I pIIid lit foredoIoUre nther lhIIn the $2 10.000 pur(twt prite paid by Compmy B 10 Bank I. The regulations art tOmtWhil unclear, 5«. tion 301.7425.4(b) (I )(i) btginl with "ltlhe !dUIII amounl paid lor the proptt. ty... be'ng rtd«mtd,' This alTl(lunt it dtr.ntd lIS IOIIow$: "'The ilCtual _ nl ~id for property by 0 purt:hoser, other than the holdt r of the lien being fon· clos.td. is the amount ~id by him al lhe Ale. "4 Com[Mny B might lrguo lhIIt ~ pur· ~ rdtrs 10 the [Mrty to whom the IRS is a.s.rting its right to rtd«m, aoo lIS such. the starl ing point in calculating the "amount to be [Mid- is tilt $2 10,000 it p~id 10 Blnk 1 nthu thlln the

$200.000 paid by Bank I ... t /oRc:Iotu"'In suppOrt of Com~ny B's lTgu~nt, 1301.7425-4((1(3) (diltu»ing the title rt«i""d by the IRS upon . redemption) implies that "\t.. pUrc/w.tr" is"lhe ptr. ton, from .... hom the district director rtdmntiIlhe property,The IRS would diAgrct with 8's argument giV'tn its intutst in prottcting tilt dtlinqu.nt taxpayer's (Com· pany A's) equity in the property and

eomc-r

THE ALABA."tA LAIWtR

insuring that", full price is paid lot louAs support for t~ IRS·s poPlion, in KYt ...1 plac~$ t~ rtllullotioru; includt the 1'1"._ "and his _ r in Inttral. if lony."'!i The TlUSury Dq:t.I.rt_ mrnt contemplated subsequent trnufus such ~ t~ Solie to Company B. yet neitht. this phrllM' nor somtth ing simi lar thereto lppear! in U301.7425-4(bH l j(i) or JOI.1425-4(b)(2) Ikfonifli tilt iImOWlt \0 bt paid .....,\h \hill in mind. it _IrIS tN.t "tM id.wol amount paid" rtft., to the unount paid by a pu~. at ronclosure !thf amount ploid by Rank I) "'the. thin iUI amount paid for the property by such purchnu·s SUCctnOr in tntemt (Comp.J.rl)l B). The -amount paid- ;ssut is p~5enled in 8Iock 11. U.S ..' which invoMd I Quitt titll; pr««difli in ronllKlion with fore· closed property upon which the IRS hid fKOfOed lo WI; litfL Tlwft. the JiUlwory 31 , 1986 foredosure ule pflce wu S33.916.26.1 1M hoIdtr 01 lhe Htond and third ~ rtdftmed the property by paying 133,916.26 plus 10" inttru\.' The property ...."M laler Klld to l.oeda iliad for $122.225.05.' On Jan. uary 29, 1987. two days before thoe expirUion of t he one YUf period of redemption. the IRS offered to redeem thoe PJOI)trty from Bilek for S33.9 16.U p1w ~ inttmlll "Blick. who hid paid $122.225.05 for the property, rdum Ihiloffer_" 11 The IRS immediately ~rded a ~rtifocate 01 Redtmption of Rul I'roptrty by United States" and quitclaimed the property to a third plfly pu rchaur for $66.000.12 The District Court hoeld in fa\'Or of B~k statin, that "the P'tfTllmnt's ttnclef to plaintiff in this call: 01 $36,064.60, for property for which silt Itgiti"",tely paid $122.2'25,00, clotu~.

01 '. _ ....... . .,III

00.*00." ... IS ..

---'---"'_. ... -_. _.II' __ . '- _. . .. _ "" .._

.::

"''0 _ _

_~'Leo

'-"-"'II"_"'J.O

~'"

CoI ... _

"',

_"'Oooot"''''

... LLM .. , _ _ _

vooO. ~_

...

0CIIb00 ..... c........ ...... "'~ 0eM. .. , ..... ".... & Cool< ,, _ .-'"

Stoll !lei on ... _

THE AtAIiAMA LAWYER

is KI woefully scionobl~.-13

illMleqllite ~ \0 be uneon-

Althoullh the outeomt of BIod _ fair, the holding WIS contrary to th~ f7.t2S ~gulatiom. First, IS previously diocw.sed. tht rtgulalions indicate that th~ ·~mounl to be paid" b)' the IRS is baRd on the fo.tdos~1l' Solles price of $3.3.916.26, not thoe $122,255.00 Lotda Black "legitimately paid.- tl Sttoocl, the District Court concludtd lhIt the appli_ cable (edt ...1 stalUlts -.....ere clarly writt en with the intent thu thty bt COfIMrued in conjunction with stale law. and not 1.1 neatinll a sch(me upafale and apart from that of the statt."IS The District Court stated that -(c)turly. the Code and regulations contemplate that state law will be referenctd al eYe!)' tum when tht United Statu attempts to rfdttm properly upon which it has a W: 1ien."16 To the contrary, 1301.74254(a)(2)(ii) prmnpb Alabami law by St.lI.ing thit "KClion 7425 and thi> ..mion shall IIO"!m tilt IJTIOlInt to bt paid and the procedure to be followed." The regulations tum to Statt law in two limited circumstance" To dete rmine (i)the period within which the IRS may redtem. 17 iUld (ii)tm "amount paid" It forttlosu~ b)' a fOftClofifli litn hoIlkr .... ho mayor 1111)' not have righll to a Ikllcienq judtrmnt uncltr local taw.'a Yst. the OUtrict Court Jlated lhIt "tM Imount tendeud (by the IRS( mus t include llmounts due on other junior mt>.tgagu owned by the pu rchasu. whethe r or not owned at the time of fored05~re:I' Section 301.74254 (b)(1) maku no mention of Ihue IImount$ when u ttina forth the "amount tt> bt paid- by tM IRS upon a mif:mption.20 Instod. the regulations indiat. thit by eurcisina ill riiht of mif:mption_ tM IRS Jtrps into the ~ 01 the buyer and is subject t>nly to encumbrances that uisl lond are unior to the foredOMd interest at the time of the Io1le.21 Thus. although Black indkatu that the IRS is subject to Alabama rules of redemption, and although the case may COIIlr in handy in the event 0I1it~tjon with the IRS (Mr this iM\>t, the District Court's holding ItemS contrary to t742S and ill regulatlonilnd will not likely be fullowed by other courts. The IRS was unslKCtiSful in its attempt to appul tht Black decision (evident ly becaus< it hid quittlaimrd the property

to I third p.orty and Ileked st."Indifli to appal) and his indic.oted thit it will $HIe I ~Qlol of BIod whm tht lime C(II'I'IU.

mprovements:

•

An inut which is mt>n significant than lht "amount paid" inV!>lvts Company B·, e~pensn of $250.000 in repairing and improvifli tilt Property. Although 130U42S4(b)(l) r,qui.n the IRS to pay for "up'nU$ neensarily illCurred to ""'intlin" tM prOpCrty,n t he IRS is generally not r~Quirtd to p.o.y for "improvemenu: Section 301.7425.((b)(3) $tatn is foI-

l·E~p'nses ntcts5lofily illCurred in c(lnnt ction with tht property includt. lor tJWnpit, renLlI ~nt commiiSioru.. reploi. ~nd lIIlIinte_ fW1« uptnst:S. utilities uptnMS. II;pl ~es illCtlfTed ,lttr t~ fo~ cl osu,e ule and prior t o the redemption in defending the tllll; lCQui .. d th rough 1m (oreclosure salt. and a proportion,lIe amount of cuualty insuranc~ prtmiums lond ~d valorem tues. f mproH-

mmls made to the

p;opt;t~

art

no/ cOMid,,,,d af an up,ns,

unless the amounts mcun-ed far well improcemenls <ITI n«asoriI~ incun-ed to main/am lIN ~ ffl~."

(el1ljl/'will added)

As thoefe is vtry little (if iUly) ta$f I,w on point, the IRS argues tN.t if expenses art 01 the type which muld bt capitali&ed for income tu putpOilU ... ther thin currently deducted. then s\ldl uptNU ire not "ntcessarily incurred t(l main· tain" the property ind should not bt Included in the .ed.mplion purchau priet. Ctnerally. uptnses for ordiniry lond neetillo!)' repairs to property used in a trade Or busine.ss or held for the production of income may be dtducted in the yur paid or incu rr~d.n wherus Up'nU$ for p'rmanenl improvtments that either add \0 the Vllue III the pr0perty or appreciably proIona its life must becapiLlliud.U As $lJCh. .,.,..., if most III Company B's up'nses ~.~ lSSOCiated with tnvironmrntal clean-up costs Or weft nteessary to comply with IOQI buil ding COOts or 1111'$ such as the Americans Wi th OisabilJanl.llry 1993 / 41

;Iiel Acl. Ind tvtn If Com~ B wu required 10 "plJfe Ih~ luklnll roof. dl'llinJlt lyittml. welfock. Illturu. flully elntrkll wlrlnl and IIa/1tina. cIoor$, "io!dowl, frnI:a. "'" JIJ 10 limply bri.... the f'roprrt)l to a tvndition ....it. IbIr IOr~"""'" br~ B, the IRS will not Inch. • iud! ~ n In iu rfdemptlon ""rchast price If ItICh C:lptll$U were Inc:umd in connn;· lion with an oyuall "Improwment" of thr PRmUn talH", for I aplwiwlon tnthtr ttun I curnnt deductionl of IUd! apnlHI lOr inoomt WI purpOlU. 0bYi0us1y. thr .nOlml payable by thr IRS Illillnillclntly diff"ent from the amount which would be ~ upOn I redemption by other creditorll under ~ law. Sedoon &.S-253(.I) d the Code of Alllkmil (19751 requiru "1llnyont entillcd and duirinlill redftm ral abllc" to ~ for tJw value of imPf'O'/lfmmb" iIllCCOf' cWu wilh t &.S-:lS4. If iflOthtr fndi· lor d Cornl'l"l' A IwdI ~ I "BIn. 2" with a $Kt.InII ~ on lht Property lIIyinll ~riorllY IMr the IRS tu litnl were to enrclM ill rlthl of rmmpllon. It would likely PlY Company 8 tome · lhtftby pbcintj thlntj clost to COmJWlY B in lubillnlill1y the lime financial poailion » aiIkd prior to its purclllH d Ihr property from I. Nevnlhclul. if Blnk 2 uuci.ed il$ ri&tIt d mltmption by p&yi"ll Cotnpany B 1460.000. or in 1M allemliliw. if a Ihird .party bouahllhe I'roJItrty from COITIIN'lY B for ill f,oi, markd value • 1460.000. lht IRS could wert III ril&ht 10 rtdem1 lht I'roptrty from 8.lnk 2 or JUl'h third.party. as Ihr cast miY be. b)I ~ng $200.000 plUl Inlernt ~ inc;· drnlll miinttNTICC ~

-,.,..,.....,nt

S460.ooo.

BIn.

PriOrily

Liens:

•

Another li8Jlifiant differ· ence bttwfm the IRS rilhl of mitmption and !hf,t • other eMilIon undtr AlabarN law ilthe ability d IhI: IRS 10 rcdtftn without UiIlslyirc priority Iiml. Stction 301 .74~icJ(3l_tl»

,,-

"When a «rtif'IQIIC • mltmplion .. ItWi okd. illlwlJl frrImkr to 1M tmiltd SlIIla III/I"" ri9/r1s. 1iI~. lind klf"" t in lind 10 til. .~"m~ pro".. IV acquired bV 1M ".,--.Irom whom tM district 48 1 )JIlUlry 1993

dir«Irx ,iJd<u,wd tlw P'fIIJCf16. 1f!r virtue '" Iht II~ of the property. Thtrtlort. il undtr Iooal bw Ih~ purchUCT Illra titlt lru of liens junior 10 tJw lim 01 the fortdc.ing 1if:, .. 1'- tiNt. SlIIla taUs tit. ' - ofIUd! junit, Iims /4I0I'l r"d"mptiorl 01111, prOPflrt,.Icrnphuis ..sdtd)

'IoIcIc,.

This Hction wookl_m to Inns(er to lht IRS -.11 the rights. til~. and mter· OSI" acquirtd by ~ny B...... ict.. in our hypothttiul. would be "Iht pt:r· son .. .from whom Iht diltrict director ~mtd the proptrty: As CcfnIwIy B acquired tku lit~ to lht I'n:Iptrty. subita only 10 Iht ri&tIt of ,to;;mplion hdd by other junior (milan '" ruord. it 5Hrns thai 1M IRS would iK(luift tho: IlITlt clur Ill~ without hMng to ~ if!)' litns hMlIII priority ~r lhat oIlhe IRS ..... r~lnt. SUlton 6-5 ·2U(cl 01 \ht Cod" of AJaINurrII. on tilt other hand. IIIln ill

"'_

"When any judllment cre dil or OT junior mortgagot or any tr~fUferu of a judtmtnl emhtor or a junior ~ rtdmm unlit. Ihis lr1ic~.1II1 rYCfNdtd judgm."I•• r«O.dflfl morlJlO9fI /I1Id ,KO/dod limI ~ IIIr/jJ1wr IKOIFitd priori/, in uistma 01 t" lime oft"" sol' II,., rao(,Yd IiIlm\ lhe rt;a] tstale ndHlMd 1M 'pimt Ihe rtdttming p... ty Ind luch Ihlll become lawful dl,u'tI pursulnl 10 ICcllon 6-5·

253(1)(4\

/0'" paitJ oIf

ion:

a/ ,,"''' ....

(emphlltl Iddtd)Thul. Iny creditor OIlItr IIIIn lht IRS mUJIlitisfy pnority litfU upon. rtdtmption. To further iIIustntt thut confIictinS princ:I~II. ilIIain ulum, that fbnk I Kill lhe Property to ~ B. but the rut ablte rtCOnII ftflect.ln chronologi· al order, llank I wilh I nl'1t mortgage. &nk 2 with I KOJnd mot'tlllllt'. 1 judg. mmt crtdilor uw;I tho: IRS lien. If 1M IRS utrtiKI iU riChl 10 ~m from Compa;1)' B. IlIlHd not ~ JIIl'.........u to &nil 2 01' lht iu6iJIIUI\ (mtitor. On lht oIhtr hand, if the judanlmt creditor mlHms Ihr Property from eornp..y B. II rrut, ....... AIibima Int. satWy Bank 71 Kcond~. and ~ COlllpl." B 1M purclwl price. "bwful chargn" (inc:ludina Ihr bir mir1<tt val..., '" per· mintnt Improvtmen ll) Ind Interest on such amounl.l. If lilt IRS tlltn redums

the Property from tJw iudimenl crtdi. tor. the IRS would not haw: 10 rei ....... ne

IhI: judtmtnt crtdotar for IhI: amount it paid 10 Banlr 2.14 Ind tile rt<itmplion IfI'ia' would aPn lit buai on Bank 1"1 fortdoMIft price. S2OO.ooo nthtr than the ItI'IOIJn\ PileI by the judgrnml Cftdj . tor to ~ B. lIndtr Iht5t circum1IIII<:el. 1M judg.mnt crfd,tOf would hIIvt lTIlIik. big mlslakf.

conclU510n:

~ •

See llon 742S(d1(21 II I triP for unwary fntrcprt · rvun ItICh u Comp.\fI)' 8 ......., W(M.lld be Olll.a·pockd by» much IS S260.ooo in tilt r'o'fnl the IRS utrclses i\l riIlht • ~ What I WI lim .. in pIa<t. t74251dl(21 dfediycly pr""nll "im. proyanm\I" to othawiIo: IIIfIITO'Iuctiw Jom:ioMd "' ....," during lht ant yur period 01 rtekmption. Thus, many plOp-

I,.

~rtitl

must

re~ln I~nl

",nlilllw

period d mkmption tnds. If I penon

milWotnly "~" foncIost<j prop-

trty upon wIlkh tilt IRS ~ a WI lim. t 742S(d)(2) allows tilt IRS 10 colltct III taxellt ItICh perton', upenst Jnd tfffC' 11~ly pnvenlll rtdtmpl ion by othu priorily ertdllor.» OIhrl'lO'iK Illowrd by AlabImIInt. Whm f.omI with a dimt who wishn 10 PI.I'd1* or mIHm loftcloHd property upon which tIw: IRS his a III litn. MtorntyS must !urn tho: lie· nirKlnt diffntnca belWftn t742S1dl(21 and Iht ~ITII rulu • mcmption. and ill the "fry It»t IIMR tho: dime 10 Mid purchuinC the property lOr more than Ihr foftcloluft II~ price or mill· Intj"jmpr\Mmtnll- 10 tIw: PI'O!>t'r1y duro Ing lilt one ~Ir period of reikmption.

ENDNOTES I. '''''., ... 1>00 ~ 11M Tr......,

Doc>o".

,.-....... -

_wiIlI.IIO.OIIUIIO - . . . _""'_ in. f .~. IlIC'7tI" 2. 1./Ioko.I ............ . . . - .Il10 , ... 01 ~.t

....

",,_c...Ib, • I _

1 .... '.11~ t 1_ ....... 4 s.. U :J011US-41'MU(~ij .... lI UUS·

....

4!'H 4 ~

5. .......

,, ,

u.s.. 6C'...... TrOI/'ULAIo. IJI7l,

t. 14.,1711

10. 14. 11. 101. .. 12. 101. .. 17f"

1m Il1o _

ll. .... t:Jtl.l~ l ~ I • . Block. OJ 176.

15.1.1.0' n •. 16. n.. IllS ,....,. mImn _ _ I><OI>Cft7wit11o in Iht ...... 0( 120 ~ '""" Itw _ of Il1o bon ......

_low.

IRe f

1'0"

...... "'''-Il10. I

_ 0 I .... 1hooI_ •••

m5(4)(I ~

It. ~ •• too-•. lho\ ,1>0 .... ,,~ 01'1>0 _ _ 10 bo po..r" ;. .. foIIowo: ""(ivl W;'" mpoCtlO ...... _ . _ . . . _ 3 1.

"""'

Thio ....... only . . . . . - ......... ""

Rtt. 1lO1.1U 5...lbll2lOO: ... obo ..... .

pja in R... IJOI.1QS.4IbH51. I&. 14. OJ 11"5.

in _

hi< _

"" Ion<looutt >>It 10 • hold« " . ....... lion...... . . Rot. I JOI.7' ~I~)(I~1>t) I......... _ I.

- " " ..... Ofltw """"" - . . .........

11. So.

l ..... of. _ _ ..... '"

" " ~ Of

tho

n.. _

,.""nm.n'·, "d.mp'ion p<.iGd. RI I. f 301 . 7~)(l)(o.j.

zz. IJII; H

IQ, 21Z: RoC.

I.l a~ .

ZJ.IIII; UQl~I):""f 1.1" ' "

rM..,priorlO

:u. So. IRe 1lO 1 .7~M')(i ) ;n.;. ~

tho !;on""',

""",ito only ... """""" ....... oft., tho /on.

Iootdoo\o .. wit. -no. ,.

_ .· .... 1301.7o12S-O("oXI~j). 20. .... f JOI.7U$-O«I(3). ~l.

... .

-...ruo.o

,.,. iMo,oorod in wiIIo .... _,.". _ .... Ion<looutc ........ tho ond 0( Iloo

-..,.. "'" .... ritIh< .. _ • <1.0,..... of u.. _'"

<101"" "I,

_""""f

10.

.nd bolor. ,1>0 ,«Jtmplion hoIoItt of. lion ..... kl1_" Iloo Ion<loourt _. - " " ' /0 dw _ ...... d",". -) t .... p ....I . . .dodj: ....110 I RC flO L. 702$-1(10J(S)lf.Dmplo 31. •

.. __. r-----------------------------------------------, "";1I.ft I"_!sod

_""dIO~

ADDRESS CHANGES Complete the form below ONLY if there are any changes to )'OUr listing in the current Alabama Bar Directory. Due 10 changes in the statute governing election of bar commissioners, we now an: requ ired to use members' office addresses, unless none is available or a member is prohibited from receiving state bar mail althe office. Additionally, the Alabama Bar Directory is compiled from our mailing list and it is importanllo use business add resses for lhat reason. NOTE: If we do not know of a change in address, we cannot make the necessary changes on our records, 50 please notify us when you r address changes. Plene mail fOJTII to; Alice Jo Hendrix, P.O. Box 671. Montgomery, Alabama 36 101. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "1ember Identification (Social 5«urity) Number Choose one:

o t>1r. o Mrs.

0 Hon. 0 Miss

0 Ms.

D Other _ _ __

FuI1Name _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Business Phone Number __________ Race ________ S.. _ _ _ _ __ Birthdale _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Year of Admission ______ _______________________ Firm _____________________ ________ _________________ Office Mailing Address, ______________ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ City _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Slale _ _ ZIP Code _ _ _ _ __

County _ __

Office Street Address (if different from mailing address) _________________

City _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

State _ _ ZIP Code _ _ _ _ __ County _ __

L __ __ ___________________________________________ J THE ALABAMAUwn :R

J~uuy]993 / 4 9

ABOUT MEMBERS, AMONG FIRMS ABOUT MEMBERS Cordon C. Ann. lronll, Ill, formerly ",jlh Clark. Doen &. Copeland. annOunC-

es t ht opening of hi. office at 205 Congrus Street, Mobile, Alabama 36603. The mailing add ress i. P.O. Bo. 14&4. Mobil., 36633. Phon. (205) 434·6428Joh" Tho ..... Hom announces the opening of hi, (Jlli,' at 2800 Zelda

Road. Suite 100·9, Monlgmery, Alabama 36]06. Phone (205) 271-4789. Chulu C. Elliott , fonn .. ty s.c," tary and CI"I1,..:1 for Southern Life and

Health Insurance Company, announces the opening of his office at 3918 Mont· clair Road. Sui te 120, Birmingham. Alabama 35213. The mailing add.en is P.O. Box 530893, Birmingham, 35223. Phone (205) 879·1075. Rid....... W. Vic"" announces the

(lmc •. The new om," is localed at 116 Mabry Street, Selma. Alabama, Phone 12(5) 872-5545. Robert H. ford announces thai he has withdrawn from t:rnond 0; Vines and opened hi. offic. at Two M.troplex Driw. Suite Ill. Birmingham. Alabama 35209. Phone (205) 868· 0104. He also has an office at 3322 S. Mel1\Qrial Park· way. Suite 22B, Huntsville. Alabama 3S801. Mal)' P. WllllamJOn , formerly with Gorham 0; Waldrep. announces the opening of her office at ]9]9 Morris Avenu • . Suite 1300, Bi rmingham. Alaba· ma 35203. Willi .... HOII. ton Ollnr btcame a member of the Madrid. Spain bar in Septembe" He was admitt.d to the Alabama State Ba. in 1984.

ro1ocation of his office to 100 W. College Street. Columbiana, Alabama 35051. The mailing address i. P.O. Box 649. Phone

AMONG FIRMS

(US) 669-1771. K. Bon.... n announces lhe opening of his office al 10 Lafayelle Sireet. Haynevill e, Alabama 36040. The mailing address is P.O. Box 337. llayneville. 36040. Phone (205) 548· 2244. J. IIII~hoel B.oo... ann(lunCU Ihe opening of his office al 1314 Sixlh A".nue. Deatu r. Alabama 35601. The mailing address i. P.O. Box 1626, Dtatur.35602. Phone (205) 355·9151. toonull F. 1111 .... 1 announces the (>!It'ning of his office at 200 E. Second Slree\. Bay Minelle. Alabama. The mailing address is P.O. Box 296, Bay Mineue. 36501. Phone (2(5) 937-0046. J. IIIleb.oel Can...., announ~ the relocation of hi' offic. 10 Hall. Sherrer .. Smith. 316 N. Oales Street. DOlhan. Alabama, Phone (205) 792·6752. knoll W. 111••• 0:1 annOunces the (>!It'ning of his office a1250 farley Building, 1929 Third Avenue. N" Birming. ham. Alabama 35203. Phone (205) 251-4775. Mldol Beth Stiller of Montgomery announce. the opening of a .econd

C. b . nh . , Joho . ton , Culln e r , Dllm.. .. O'No. ] anooullCes the firm has moved its offices to Park Place Tower. Suite 700. 200] Park Plac~. North. Birmingham. Alabama 35203. Phone (205) 252· 8800. Mt a ch a m . Flo .., ... " Euley announ~ the .elocation of its offICe. to 5704 BeallwoOO Conneclor. Columbus. Georgia 3]904. Phone (706) 576-4064. Jobn T. MOOYU lllllh announces that Ho ... rd E. Bo,.r. has become associated with th~ firm, with oflien located at 100 Brooh'oOO Plac~. Suite 202. Birmingham. Alabama 35209. Phone (205) 871 ·3437. Gratlllid. " Bel» . announces that Anne EII •• btb MeGo .. ln and Roy Wylie eran,er, U ha". become associ · ated with the firm. Offices are located at ]38 Adams Awnue. Montgomery. Alabama 36104. Phone (205) 262-2000. Th e A... erlcan Mental Hulth Coun»lon AsIGeI.llon announce. the appointment of M• ." Lyn Pike as executiw directo •. effecti". July 1. 1992. Offien are located at 5999 Stev. nson Avenue. Alexandria. Vi.ginia 22304.

aan....u

50 1 January 1993

Phone (703) 823·9800. Stone. eran. ", Cro. by " B]aclrbum anflOUnceS thai L. Brian Chunn has become an associate of the firm. The mailing add .... i. 1'.0. D. awe . ]509. Bay Mineue. Alabama 36507, So ... fori, DtnJOn, Hon ley, Peltey " Mulln announces that Corlnlle Tatu ... Hunt has b«ome an associ.te. Offices are located at 709 Awnu. A. Ope. lik •• Alab.ma. Th. mailing address ;s P.O. Box 2345. Opelika. 36803. Phon e

(Z05) 745·3504. OIlL...d " F, .,IIJOn anflOUnceS that Rleh.rd F. Ha n ley and V. n .... Tho ..... ha". become associates. Offices are localed at The Massey Building. 290 21st Stre.l, N.• Suite 600. Birmingham. Alabama 35203. Phone (20S) 2SI.2823. Ru , hton, St.kely, Jobn . ton .. e.neu announce. thai kay C, Vlh. but , 1'.101 III. Jam .. , J • • and N. WlI,)'1Ie Slm ..... J •• have become ass0ciate •. The mailing address is 1'.0. Box 270. Montgomery, Alabama 36101.1)270. Phone (20S) 834·8480. J.eluo" " T.ylo. announces Ihat St_n "" Martino has become a memo ber of Ihe fi.m. and lhe firm name will be J.d.. on, T. ylor " lII . rt]no . Offices are located at SoulhTru.t Bank Building. 61 SI. Joseph St ••• t. Su ite 1500. Mobile. Alabama 36602. The mail. ing addrus is P.O. Box 894, Mobile. 36601. P~ (20S) 433·3131. Br. nn.n " Guy announces that AndJo D. BI.... hnel • • J •• and HII'" R. Evon • • III . f(lrmerly city attorney for the City of Montgomery. have become associated with the firm. New offices are located at 602 S. Hull Street. Montgomery. Alabama. rhone (205 ) 264 · 8118. Ba lch" Bln,h.m announcts that Cluk R. H .... mon. has become a member of lhe fi.m in lhe Birmingham office. The firm also announces that R. Brute Bane. J ... Davlll B. B]ock, M.tthe .. W. Bo.. den. Courtney L. Do.,e. LarY)' S. Lo, tdon, R.nda ll 0, McClanah.n, C. G •• d.y Moon, III, Li.. J. Sh.aTJI, and Terri E. WU· JOn ha". joined the Birmingham office

THE AU\8AMA U\WVEJ:1

as U$(lCiitts. MId tNt Cynthia A. Hollan" his joined the Montgomery office as an U$(lCiite. The firm his two Birm· in8hlOm offices. Ind one uch in Hunt5ville and Monlgomery, Alabama. and Washington. D.C. Crace II: Sha.. annourocn lhe uk>ClIlion of th( (jrm 10 108 Jdf(rson 5Ir(el. N•• Hunl$vilk. Alabama 35801. !'hone (205) 534-0491. Do. I"ld•• Fle\(her, Yelldl .. , . Wood. Lloyd announce, lhal Scoll P.trick Archer and Jud,y P. Ha mu ha~ b«om( USOCilOltd wilh Ihe firm. with offices al 212 1 IHghland Avenue. BirminllhlOm. AllON~ 35205. Phone (lOS) 939·0033. AU . . . RH ... lnnounus lhal "En ... Cn.. e haJ joined Ihe firm. Crowe is a 1989 admillte 10 Ihe Alaba· ma Stale Bar. The firm has omen in Ntw Orluns and BUon Rouge. Louisiana. Mobil •. Alaba11\ll .md Washington. D.C. 1.IIl' She,.,. I"le. lind J . Cleo a lIkEI...,.. f,-,"""rly "'ith the firm 01 Sherwinler & Toka ... announce Ihe formation of She,.,.lnler II: Md!lrol' . with omea wtt<! al lSOI Peachtue StrHt. Suitt 250. Allan .... ~ 30309. PIKlnI: (404) 35$-9800. MeElroy isal988~I· lee to the AIobanwo Stoote lUI •• Eln. Nettl. . . Scotln anoouncu Ihlt LlIn.le A. A.... has join(d the firm <15 an associale. Offices are wtt<! lOt 2728 8th SITffI. TU$<;aIOOJa. Alabama. Phone (205) 758-5591. HolII. II: Luthe ... IJUlouncn tNt A. W..... t.e.tIN ... 1IM b«ome 10 member 01 the firm. Offices are Iocatt<! at U E. first Avenue. N.. Winfield. ~. The mailing add ' UI il P.O. Box 708. Winfield 35594. Phone (205) 487-4301. Oflien ar( also IO-ClOled at 109 Fiul SI •• e" S.!: .. FayeUe. Allblma 35555. Ptooot (2QS) 932-8866. H ......, "",,,"'II. Beaole, C........ II: Jobn lt on lOnnOunCU Ihat J . Michael f'lnch« and Sanob H. Slnoa rt have joilll'd iI$ .lU<Xiatu. Office. no located al 3000 Firsl Na t ional Bank Building. Mobi le. Alabama. ~ mailing lddms is r.O.Box 123. MobiIt.l66Ol. B....ut)l, Aruli. R_ II: White and Valcan M.te.la" C. " ,a" l' Innounu tNt Oo"al" M. J •• u his b«om< ..,nlor vke·pruidffit lInd ge""r· al counsel of Vulcan. Tanner II: Cain announces Ihal

AII,. o .. L. E......... 11M Mcome lin u.ociat(. omcn If( locat(d at 2711 Unive"ity Boultvllrd, Sui t e 700. Tutcaloosa. Alabama 35401. Phone (2(15) 349-4300. Najjar. Den bu.., announces that Tho . . . M. Le .. l , has jointd ilS an 1I1$«iat•. Offiuo au located" 2125 MOrTis Avenue. B;rmi~m. Alaba11\ll l52Ol. Phone (205) 8400. P..,.loo, Cro .. e , B..", S.lIh • Ke,ler announce, Ihat Tho •• 1 B. Miller his joined as an assoclale. Miller is i 1988 admittu to the Abbama Stilt. B.l.r. Offices are mtt<! " 1615 forum Pllce . Suite 500, Wesl Palm Bnch.

FIorillo 33406.

0 . .1.. A. c.rn..... 1 has b«ome I panner in the firm of Data, JHGflo" II: Lembd.e. and Ihe fi rm name hn bun changed 10 Dal • • J ac obs on , Lt.bdre II: C.rflnkd. Offices Ire louted It 2902 Independenl Squire. hcbonville.1'Ioridi 32202. Ptooot (9IM) 355·5467. Gminlr.1 is I 1983 admittee 10 lhe Abbama State Bar. HoltY J. Ham .... and Hel"lChel T. H.mou. J •• announce Iht formal ion of H .....n II: H ... "n. Officn are located II 2310 15th Sluet. Tusaloosa. A1aN11\lIl5401. Ptooot (205) 34l1-tOOO. L•• ,e. 51.,100. R. blo l o. II: Sa-.-.ll!e lInoouncu that WlIlI.a. "Modo., J •• , formerly ..,nior vice·presidtnllnd gennal counsel for Southern Natural Cao Company and senior vicepresidenl. regullltory lind go\"trnment lOlllIi". SONAT Cil Crou,. is now of ~ to the firm in the Birmingham

oKlee.

Daft" P. 5be,he.... Irloounca tNt JOH ,h R. hisjointd the firm as an associate. Omen aU locatt<! al 9 13 Plantalion Boulevard. Fairhope. Alaba· 11\lI 36532. Phone (205) 928-4400. RI ... II: PeleI'Mn announc •• taht Loal ... Dietltn and De"l ... V. Hill hllve become associales. Offius Ire mtt<! at 1700 FifWICi.l.l ~nler. 505 N. 20lh Sireel. Birmingham. Alabama 35203. Phone (2(15) 328·81 41. Burr II: For • • n announe .. Ihal Pa ltl Po_II B.. rh. D.rin Colllu. A1llaon Down! .... Eric: F .. nz.. Pt le C. . ..... Cft, HarI.t)I. Jeff Ml.1Ier, and Yol ,,,". Nnelt-John.o .. h"ve joined the Ilirmingham offiee as usoci. ales. and AI ... Ju",t has joined tho lIunlSvilie office as an associate.

Ke.,

rT1' c - - n......claJ C...-,oratloo announca lhat Ro .... rt H. c...... ,.,nter, J •• his joined the company iI$ gtneral counsel and senior vice-pr .. ident in Ihe company's Plymouth . MinnUOti offic(. Cupentu Is a 1975 ~m;ttH to the Abba11\ll Stale Bar. Cow_oa, Colo en II: ~ announces Illat Ral, 1I L. 0111 has brcome usocilOled with IIw firm. with offices localed lOl 2600 7th Sine t . Tu$caloosa. Alabama. The mailil\ll add.is P.O. 1Iol2507. TIISCiIoou.. 35403. S,.ln, Clllon , Croo .... Bl a o • Neu~. 01 Birmingham announcu tNl .eoole S. Moo"l' . formerly with l..Iniu. Fo . d. Shaver ,I; Plyn. in HunlSville. Ea.1 H. Moody. formt.ly wilh Wi150fl & King in Jasper. Kale B. C•• ble and AnthollJ' C. H.rl .... ha~ join.d the firm <15 USOCi.l.IU. E .. on" II: VI .... 01 Birminghm annoonca tNt -n.o- Ma.-.halI r ell 11M jointd the firm»., ~te. Flo,,,, Keener. C a l l • • n . II: Roberti lInnouncn Ihlll 0 ....1 A. KI"'krlt)l his b«omt a partner in lhe firm. Offices are located ~t 816 Chestnut Slreet. Cadsdtn. Abbama 35901. Phone (2(15) 547-6328. B""le,, Ar.ot . Ron II: While annoonces tNt Job. W. " • .-tron, Joh" E. H....ftli1lll .... Jr•• SI"a rt J. Freo!. and Paul S. Ware hlOV( joined Ihe fi rm in t ilt Bi rmingham office. and C. Rick HaU 11M joined the firm in the l1unlSvili. oIfoa. omcn ar( mit<! "I 1400 Plorlc Place Tower. 2001 Park Pilce. Birmingham. AllINmll 35203, and 200 Clinlon AvenUl. W •• Suite lIoo. Huntnille. 35801. Phone (2(15) 52 1-8000 Birmingham. and (205) 517-5100 Huntsville. Roatn, Cook. 51",e, Dam, c ..... .-oil II: JG<lU 01 TUSQIoosa lOrlOOUncu Ih.l.t Jo ...,h W. C."e has ;oint<! the firm »lOrlassoci.l.tt. Bul P. T.l' lo. announc(1 Ihat Peny C. Shuuluworth. J~•. forrIlI'rly with Balch <I< BinShlm. hn become lOI-sociated th( firm. Offien are located lit 710 Till. Building. 300 N. 2101 StTfft, Oirmingham. Alabamll52Ol. SuM. II: Llu!etoil announcu lhal Ja.el D. 1b..IeU and Chriat .... h ... • • Hood have b«ome associ.l.lt<! with the firm. and the firm 11M relocatt<! to One Commerce Sireel. Suite 700. Monlgomery. Alabama 3610-4. •

January 19931 5 1

Helping Others Helps Us All: Law Students Donate Services

I JI

nen ~rlook.d in sUNeyo concerning pro bono work

•

p<rfornw<l by 1m legal profession .re the many hours donaltd by law sludents to persons less fnr\unale than themselves. II is an inspi. ratioo for the practicing bar in Alabama to learn of the pro bono services p.<Nid· td by the ... young . dull$. they ha", few

rTn hou r. du r ing t heir law school CIIT.eT, but still find innovative. u5.ful w~ys to ~ngag. in public int.~t work.

Cumberland School of Law The Student Bar Auociation of Cumberland School 01 Law [CSBA) .ct;".ly pursues public interest project ideas lor the I3w students.t the school. The Commi ttee lor the Advancemenl Qf Public Interest was follTlW this year 10 coordi-

nate such projects.oo \0 publicize them to all students. Jeandt. Rader. Cumberland', Ca rter &n-icts director, assists 52 1January 1993

by MELINDA M. WATERS chairman Ann Shook, Sc<lttsboro. with keeping the students informed about public interest opportunities.. Annually the CSBA ~ponwrs """"ra l pro bono projects to assist citi.. ns in the Birmingham Area. The Voluntu r Income Tax AMi.tance Program (VITA) offers free income \ale assistance to low income elderly, handicapped, or non· English ~peilking individuat... 1M Inter· nal Revenue Service, primary sponsor for the project, prO\lides training f_ of charge for the l.w .tu<lent. and aline.:. eSS.1T)' form •. Actu.1 ,ites for the VITA clinics are arranged by and ad""rtised through the IRS and are typically held in public librarin or community centers. TIlt CSSA provide. office .upplie. and. of course. law student volunteers. In addi· tion to participating in clinics during the tax sea,on, 'tve ral .tuden\.'! volunte.. with the IRS on a ~.ar·rou nd basi., speaking to various organizations or working with late·filing individual tax·

payers. David Weilbatcher, Dallas. Tn...,

serves this year ... director of the VITA project for Cumberland. For the palt """,r.1 yeaT$, the CSBA has sponsored an Explor .. Post of the Boy Scouts of America. The purpose of this post is to provide car... and hobby information to young persons between the ages of 14 and 20. In order to meet its goat... the CS SA worn on thi' project both with the Binningham Area Council of Boy Scouts of America and the Binn· ingham office 01 Balch & Bingham law

The p<'l5t meets at Cumberland School of Law two evenings each month. Judges. lawyers and professors make pre· oentalions to the groups. Field trips are off..ed to the off.ttl of Balch & Bing· ham, the courthoU5e. and own the }ail. The young people are also given the opportunity to view a mock trial. tour the schOOl law library and lu rn about admission requirements for law school. TH E AlABAMA ~WYER

------------~-----------ThI: Birmingham Aru Council of Boy ScOUII

01 AmtriCll provides support

the post, including training for adult

ltacXn. a Mrvi« tum

""'~r

to advi$l

tho: studtnt post luders. and " program of Ktivitiu 10 supplement IhoK of tho: CSBA poi\. A w«ktnd leadmhip retreat <IS is a too. of local bU$i. MIMI Optraling at nilthl in ItIt 8inn_

;11150 prwided

ingtwn arb. Shawn Junkins, Gulf SIlom., pmident of the CSIR is selVins iIS student director for the post this yu •. Volu"!«' li.w studtnt pOSt J...dm indudo: Arrr, Him""'Iwrlght. Auburn; Mark Cibson. Slone Mountain. Georgia: Ann Shook. Scottsboro: Ind Maggie Bal/lty. Columbus, ~;.. Jtw: Vogtle of llaJeh 6; Ding. ham Kr'YU as dirKtor of the Explore. Post and is assisted by oth« lIttomeys of

the nrm. Oavid Chlolldler, LiM Shotrp and ~11y Kellt». During the 1992 spring bruk in Muell. tight Cumberland law students

and the CSOA', utcutivt It.cretal'}'. Co.1lI York. lra .... tt<! to W~. Tens, \0 volunt.er for Habilll for Humanity. Arnngtmtnts ",en nude by student Amy ltimmdwright through the I'\IItion· al Habill.t hudqw.l1e". Mt'4Ilt and lodging wue prIJvided by Waco Irea

"'"-

The law 5I\ldmts worIctd primlrily on two!>ornes while in Waco. Thty pIIinted. erected fencing and Illid walkways and Wnrr.IIks.. SM:nllludmts ~n htlped with roofing lind Ihingling jobl. The familiu tMlmI'"," worked with the .tu_ dents throo,gtJout the week u did otho:r volunteers from the iI1U. Shawn Junkins summariul the u~rience; - Though IT\lIny other students t",,,,,led to lIOtic pl",u for spring bruk, I do not think M'l)'OOt had u much fun as thoK of us who went to Wuo. Sun , we worktd from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. twr')' day, and were tired and lOre. but the fulings "'-e all had in our harts whtn IIlitlt IK'I' Nmtd Johnny thanktd US fIJr helping build Habitat h<>rnts for familitS likt hi> can't bt btat. We all brought holTlt a lot more than we Ittt with. The u~rience lind IIppreciation that "''f giintd from tn\-eling tIJ WacIJ are far gruter than anything many will ever know unless they pIIl1icipate in such a projm."

TIlE ALABAMA LAWYER

Accompanying Ms. Junkins and MJ.. YOI1c to WiICO ..... re law stU<kn15: D.1niel Barker of New Bern, North Carolina; Richard Voight 01 Spartanburllo SOuth CaroliN; Chris OiCwrgio of Binningham; Melissa Gifford of Chicamauga, Ceorgia; Tommy Douglu of Birming· ham: Cath» Calloway of NashviUe, Ten · nnue; and Ed Frida of CIU .... ilter,

"""'Untwrsit)o of Alabama

organiu sumlTltT internships with par. tiolWltilllllocal bar IISIOciations and itga.1 se"";cn groups in Alabama. The NAPILat the law school is tlWred by Dan Cochnn of Birmingham. Other offiars include; "indy Hillman of Brewton. coullitl; Stacty Haire of Huntsville. publicity chair; Cithy Cupent .. of NilShvillt, Tmnwee, /undRisiRl chair. and F.lkia Brooks of Mobile, (RoJid Halt of Huntsville and Sonya Po...-ell of Chtsa_ peake. Virginia. special projecu co·

School of Law

""'~ T\IiaI\oos.a aJQ cl\arrue. Iui\-e greatly

The Student PIImh Law Sociel}' It the University of Alabama School of Law l;On$iJts of cloM tIJ 50 ~r«nt of the slu· dtnt body al the law ochool and ...,uaUy Klecu thru philanthropic projects for its membership. This )'Ur, the students unanimously voted to support public inttmt law ftllowshiPJ. DuriRl a f'ftCnt dllSs reunion held by tilt 111.0 s.:0001. Student Furllh raised onr 54.500 th rough I siltnt auction which will be used to fwId publll: intere$t law inttm· !.hips for studmts duriRl SUmmer 1991. This )'Uri offie«s of Studmt rarnh include: Gary Howard, Ibrt.sene, president; M~rit Robbins, Silv(r Sp rings, Marylmd. ..;ce.pruidtnt; SlItlton Fou, Montgomery, treasurer. TlImmy Dobbs. Birmingham, Itcretuy; ~nd Brian Whit., HartHlle, student recruitm.nt. Social oo-clWrs II"' 1m. Walhty. Milton. Floridll. and Sharon Whulu. Signal Mountain, Tenneuu, Guided by Proftswrs Pamtla Buey and Brian ~ir. I.Iw students recently established II campus chapur of the National Auo<;1l1tion (or Public [nterut Law {NAPILj. NAPIL is a walition of law stu· dent organizations throughout the counlry Ihllt oflus granll and other forms of auiSl~nce 10 stud.ntl lind rectnt graduates engaged in public interest employment. The University Law ScIlooI chap\fr .serves lIS a clurillllhousr: for i~ !'tWiRl to ""bill: ;nttrest employment opol1unitiu and sponsors seminars at the law school duigned to fOlter internt among studtn\$; in this I)"pe of $I'M«. It aIao nistS funds lOr publk intemt ~llowshipS and il supporting the .ffor\s of tht Alabama Stat. Bar VoluntHr l.awyers P!"Ojfram to

bmefittd from the individw.1 tffolU of "~ral law students. The local "Meals· on·Whttls" projecl, through which muls m dtli\... red ""''Y ""ftk to elder. Iy. homebound citizens, is assitltd by students Dee Anderson of Monroeville. Alu Goldsmith of Birmingham. Amy Hubbard 01 Attalla and Ward Buion of Montgomery. D.1vid Tomllruon of ~ renee works with his church group to make and deliver meals for HOlIpiCf of Tusc&loosa. Deborah ~ King, Gig Har· bour of WWling!.on and Sklla ShKkleford of Binningluim are rolunturs for the Tuscaloosa "Spouse AbuK Network: and Amy St"in of Scottsboro plans annual blood drivu at the I,... scOOoI. VOlunteers with the United Way B,g Brotherl8ig Sister program locally are Kdvin Jonu 1\1 oI l1untwilie and Cathy Carptnttr. Mr. Jonn h.u al$O tutored studmts at both Mal1in L. King, Jr. Ele· mentary School and Stillman College. Student Julie MOlloy IJf Muscle Shoals KI"VU lIS I Cirl Scout leader and Ward Buion. Cathy Clr"~nter and Jib Brabston of Binningluim :;l fe working with Tuscaloosa Proj~cl Lite"'C)' U.S. Through a program SpOr\5Qred by the uw School Student Bar Assoc~tion. n~ral Jtud.ntl havt volunleued to tutor _nth grade "al·rl.o;k" children in TusalOOiSl Middle School. For an Initial four-wuk ~riod. lilt voiuntun assist their assijlntd students ",;th KhooIworIc lind $Iud)' skills. The students are then evaluated by tilt rolunteen to determine whethtr furthtr tim. with the child would be benefkial. Windy Hillman 01 Brewton, Mark Sabel of Montgomery, Robel1 Minor of Gulf Br.eze, Florida, Courtney Stallings of Atlanta, Ctorgia January 1993 / 53

--- ~ --and Christine J.b rit Coody of Mont gomny have each provided special attention to needy children through this project. Oan Cochran. chair of the law school's • c.""""",1aI '" IltUIl CoIIr<lIonI • j>\td;.,." II ~ ...

eo...

• F", 18 :-\·I'(:',.Ii N<I-'<,

• On< Th.... Dol> Eo'", • U.. , Friondl, "",,"U. "~_ • A _Ie f ""'" 6< '.<lten • _ _ 5.1 10' - .

• Com ..... Tkk.... Sn/< .. • Tru<I A<""'m;oQ II Cht<k \\'nlint

• ......... AIIonbbl<. &

f r«

"'1"'' ' ' 1>1<

lkmol\Str~tion

Program Mailable

f or Information Ca n (800) 8n14 57

, ~ JS Technologies. Inc. • ", • 5001 West Brood St ....

Richmond. VA 23230

CARNEY & NELSON Forensic Document

Laboratory Handwriting Elperts

NAP1L ehaptor, \/Olunt .. ,ed I.. t Summer with DNA·PeOpI •• Ltgat Strvices in Arizona wo rking with indigent Native Americans of the Nav~jo. Hopi and Paiute triN,. In describing this pro bono experience. Dan stated: -Working in Ari_ zona helped tie up many JOOSt ends for me professionally as it really brought home how important basic first-year courses are to the pradic. of taw. Addi . tionally. working with tilt Nati"" Ameri· cans was both depressing and rtwarding - <i<!prwing because this par· ticular special group of needy citizens historically hilS often bloen <m'rtooked. but rewarding as Wl'1t becaU5e I realized how diffuent things can be and what • differtnce WI' can make in others· tivu. If enough people care. then WI' can tum th ing, around and really help those

around uS who are les.s fortunate than ourselves: As demoll$trated by theot outsunding women and men presentl y at Cumber· land and the Uni""rsity of Alabama Law Schools. helping others can make a visi. ble. positi"" diffe ",nce in our communities. It is gratifying to know that the future of OUr profes.sion rests with such commillw }"oong adults for whom profes.sionalism meall$ more than just practicing law for compensation - it muns offering your time and sl;ills to gllaran· tee that justice is acce ... ible at all time> to all persons. For regular members of the bar. the Alabama State Bar Volunteer Lawyers Program offers an organi..d. efficient me<.:hanism through which to volunteer your expertiot to help indigent citiuns in this state in civil. non· fee·ge~rating cases. More information on the project can be obtained from Melinda Waters. program director. at the Alabama State

Bar.

•

BAR DIRECTORIES

Civil &. Criminal Worl<

101._,,: Am. A' . ... , of Foow'" 5<;"", ..

••

...... $00;"', of Qu<_ 00< ...... 1lu.......

1992-93 EDITION Alabama State Bar Members: $25.00 each

Certified by

11>8 Amcric&II Booord of Forensic Document E~ami~

Non-Members: $40.00 each

Eumi ... lion of QuMionod

Send check or money order to

Will., Contracts, Deed, . and Medicol R«x>rds. Elpert Testimony

Alabama State Sar Directory

S85S Jimmy Cane. Blvd . FilWlOill Cenl.r, S~ile 240 N""""", (.0.',.,,1.0), GA )007 l

P.O. Sox 4156

(404) 416-7690

Montgomery. Alabama 36101

rill! (404) 416-768'

54 1 January 1993

TIl E Al.ABAMA LAWYER

REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON SPECIALIZATION by KEITH 8. NORMAN, director of programs & activities

ptt",li~tion' in ill simplleS! tum. it '" Q)n(tntration d a Lawyer's practice within Ont, or. at mOil. 1I few fields of law. As a .null. IIWYUS who do toncentratc Uptcllo be mon: prolkitntlhan if !hey devoted thtir lime to mlny ITtU of pr:KIi~. Although !k (oclo specialiuolion it 1I fold of legal Ii f•• tilt legal profusion has bttn .Iow in developing form ..l plans for tht recognition and ngulootion of spKiloJistJ in thrir lTi;nIng. Fo.en O\Itsidt and within the 1M. have prompted I furthtr nm to study tht poss ible implementation at a formal program, Indttd, 1m public Ikmand (or mort Ipn:ifk infonmtion to ..u;sl in finding" 1.aW)'tr tend! \0 ( n'atf a ~ for the identification of specialis!s. Whil. some lawyers consider mort lib.",Ildvtrtising rules to be I mullS 01 ""IWyi.., that ntt<I. othtn lind lId\~f' lising to be ~ inappnll'riltt. unacupt· abl. or. II but. incomplete solution. In 1990, Alabama Slit~ Bar PreJident Alv~ Caine appaint.d a tuk forc. 10 rrvisil the issue of $pKialiution. ~r ticularly in light of the Alabama Supreme Court's <ltd.ion in Ex ParI. /lowell. 487 So.2<1 848 IAla. 1986). which required the de~lopment of a rule "llowing lIdYeriiKmmt 01" certifi· cation. The task force WiS charged with .tudying whether or IlOtthe proctdurtt adopted in responK to lfoo.V!1I (Ke Nul. 7.7. A/,,/JQma Rules of ProIwiooal Con· duct). continue to be appro,.. iat. for AIahama or whether another IYI'I' pbn. including the bar's being the sole certl· fying authority for J])«ialtiu in Alab.!.· ma. WQ\jld bette r Krvt the public and the profeuion. The tuk forte wllS to consider the experience of other stale bars which 11.0", implemfnttd speciali.. tion plans. lIS well a.! the •• periencts ITIEAUJIAMA u\WYEN

olt ho.e $lale bars which have not ~ed

.$Uth plans. Chaind by WiliLawftnce of T"lIade· 1/3. the tas~ force rrvi~ various c.r· tifieation plans from around the COUJIlry. in addition to considering the

It. hh II. N .........n

ramifications of the United Slat •• Supr.me Court deelsion in Peelv. AI/omell Regisl,olion and Disdp/fn"I'Ji Commiuion 01 illinois. 496 U.S. 91 119901. which was rtleHed mortiy lIft.r the c.ntion 01 the task lorce. In that cast the Supreme Court ruled that lIIi· nois attorney Gary Peel ', Iruthful dis· closure of his civil trial certification m.... be permitted. P•• I had conlnttd his censure by th. lIIino; . Attorney RegislTlltion and Disciplinary Commi.· .ion lor reprtKnling himKll as a certi · fied legal spec; .. I;,t. eQntruy to the lIlinais Code 01 Profusioml Responsi · bility. PHi had tnrthfully printtd on hil Ittt..htad that ho WiS a "ce rtified dvil trial s])«;allJl by the Nationai lloard 01

TriiI~" The court, "ililt prohibitinlll (.Iot~lIorical bar of certification advertising. in dielllm sugguted that Ihe publi c internl In prohib iting misludinll or dH.ptive ~dvertisinll would be Krvtd by ..gubtion of certify. ing organiutions;and the contenl;and pl<Ktmenl of the acMrtistd mess.age. Mer a lI~~t d..,1 of study and work, the bsk forte p~Knltd to the bo;trd of. boor commw~rs .. plan ofleg..1 ope . ti"lintion, The proposed Alabaml Rules of Speci,liution, considered II the bo;trd', May 22. 1992 mtding. were modeled aft~r Minnes.oll·' speci .. liu· tion plln, The propoKd rults provide for the «rtification at "outside" agen· cie$ or entitit$ other than \he .tate bar Or its committeu or Ket ion., to pre' part and administer progr.. ms approved by I st"le bo;trd of certification. The proposed ruin recommendtd by the tasl! fortt ~re awrovtd by the bo;trd of bar commissioners. Pruen!ly, the Al,bama State Bu's Pennarltnt Code Commission is coruid· .ring modification of Rul. 7.7 to accom~t~ the propostd opeciaHut ion plan. Modifications to Rule 7.7 mlUt be coruidertd by the bo;trd of boor commiss~rs iJ1d.lIlong with the lptcialiulion ruiu, I]lI)rowd by the Abb.irna Supreme Court before implemen_ tat;on. As 01 May 1990, only l.slatts II.od speciaIiution plans. Since the announcement 01 the IftI dn:~, 16 out", now h.yt sp«i"liution plans "nd "t lust "''tn are preKntly considering plans, Whil. s\.ltu that ha", had tho benefit of. formll speel.hution III.. n, for s.omt tim. hive witn ....d only moderue interat by attorneys who dtsi~ to J4)t. cialiu, only time will tell how popular l]leCialization becomes in Alabama. •

llnWlry 1993 / 55

COMPARA FAULT: A PRIMER What Happens When the Lid Flies Off Pandora's Box By DEBORAH ALLEY SMITH and RHONDA K. PI7TS

if~I ~U;:'::e1~:u-::r:~~ the other gods. ornI loge/h-

er Ihell made fo r man a

woman. Alilhe gods gave gins 10 thLt _ creation. She was named Pandora, which means AI/·Cifted, since each of Ihe gods had gill01 II"" something. The losl gill was a chesl in which there was sUPPQsed 10 6e (1 great treasure, but which Prmdora was imlmcloo "I'Vf1r 10

.,.,.

EuenluollV. Pandor as curiosity gol

Ihe biiJller of her, and she dctermined /0 ...,., fo r hers.>/f what trnasure il wt1$ Iha/ the gods had gium her. 0.... dag u'hen

she uw aleme. she went 0<IeT /0 lhe rorI1RT

/Ch~

her chesl/aJl

ami QlutiouS/1l

lifted Ihe lid (or" peep. The lid flew up out of Iwr hands and Imodred her (]$ide. while Won her frightened ell'" dreadful, shadw'V shapes new oul of Ihe /!ox

in an ",,<lIeu slreom. There were hunger. dise=. u'<Ir. greed. anger. jealousi/. loil. Ilt!d al/liw griefs and hardships /0 which man from thaI da!J has

been subject. Each ",a. terrible in oppearal1ce. and as il ~. I'lmdora sow something of thll misery that her thoughtless oction had brought 0" her descendants, At l{1$tthe strnlm slackened, and Prmdoro, /L'ho hod /Jeer! para· Igud with f~ar and horro r, found strer.gth to shut her 00x. Th~ anly thing /~ft in it now, howet·u. wQS Ihe one good giflthe (JQds hud put in among so ma"y evil ones. This was hope, and si"c~ that tim" the hope that is in

56 1hnua,y 1993

man:' heart is the an/I/thing which hWi made him able 10 iJftrr the SOr7OUJS thut Pandora6rought upon him. Coolidge,

Prw

Cre~k

Myths (The Riverside

1~9)

Introduction On February 21, 1992, the Alabama Supreme Court withd rew il5 original opinion and announced that it would consider the judicial adoption of com· parative fault in LHlliams v. Della International Machine'JI Corp.. [Ms. 1901255. Feb. 21. 1992[ _ So. 2d _ (Ala. 1992). Th. court invited all intuested parties to submit briefs and partici· pate in oral argument on the issue of

whether comparative fault should b. adopted as the law of this state and. if 50, what form should be adopted. The court also requested briefs and argument on what .ffect the adoption of camparati,,,, fault would hh'e on well·establish ed rules of law such as joint and 5evellllliability, lhe prohibition on apportionnwnt of damage •. the doctrine. of last cI . .. chance and assumption of ris~. and Alabama's wrongful death st.tut •. At lust 15 amicus briefs were filed on behalf of more than 66 oompanies. ass0ciations and individuals. On May 14 • 1992. the court heard an unpr«tdented fiwand one·half hours of ollli argufTl(nt. The court took the i!';ue5 under submis· sion at the clost of argulTli'nL At pr ....· time. noopinion had yet been released. Certainly. nn one can predict what the court will (10, It could simply decline tn reach the oompaIllU,,,, fault issue. How· ewr. if the oourt does decide to reach the issue. the r.sulting opinion could dr.unaticaJly chang. the practice of law in this state. AdcIpting rompar3tiw fault involves more than simply abandoning ro~lributory negligence. The legal prin· dples lhat haw been used by the bench and bar 10 determine tort liability for more than 100 yea r. would be fortver ch anged. Adapting compar~tive fault would optn ~ judicial Pandora'$ box of other i!';ut5 IhiIt oould be th. source 01 polential confusion to the bench an bar for year. to come. Virt~lIy ....ery tort case filed in this stat. could be affected. This articlt will attempt to outlint

THE AIABA.'tA lAWYER

briflly tht differtnl forms 01 compantiw flUl1 &l!VOQled by Ihe vlriolLl partiu lOd lmici In tilt Willitmu ~ and 10 poinl OUll ftw 0( the mort imporUnt issues tNt lilt idoption 0( companliYt flull would niK. This dilCussion ~ by no meanl uhllLltivt. Countless olher imporl.lnl iUue$ will MiK if tompiIntivt bull is adopted.

Fonns of

comparative fa ull The pure form of compa rative fault lliows 1111 parties to reC(Wt. thei r darn· ~ rtduced by tllti, percen,* of bult. Tht purt form ila minority doctrine in thr Uniled SIlII:S. with only 13 01 thr 4(i comp.inliYt bult Shies tndorsing Ihis form. Thr vut majority of stilies hive opkd lor /I modififd cornpo.nliw S)'SIem. Thr modified "not as grtllt as" lonn (ilso kTlO\<m ill tilt "less thin" lonn or tilt 49 ptl'«nt rule) IIl10ws plaintiffs to rtCOvtr dI.""IIu, rtdllCed by their per~n,* of (.I.usal IIl'gligfl1c'. iiO klllg IS thrir oontribulion to lilt lotallll'Slig.nt conduct causing their injury is 'Ius than" or "not IS grtat IS" that of the parties from whom rt<:<J\Itry is sought. Tht dl.mlgtS art reduced by lilt pe.ctntagt of pillinlifr, faull. but when the pillinlilrs nelliler>ee is eqUIII to or grnter than tNl 01 thr party from whom rt'CINery is sought. the plaintiff iI barrtd from iny ncovtTy. This form of modified compaorltive fault WIS first lliopttd in Wisconsin in 1931. TenntSSft rectnlly Mume Ihe tenth stlte to IIdopt th is form. SH Helnill" u. Balenline. 833 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn. 1992). The seo:>nd modir.ed fonn i. rtf. rrtd 10 IS the "not greater than" fonn or tilt SO percent rult. Th is system lllows p;"intiff1to m:oYer rtduced da~ so Ion,g as their comparative or proportionil contribution to tilt lotil negtigence Ci~ini IlItir i'1juna. iI not grtattr than that of the putiu from whom na....-ry is soughL PLllntifts lrt Iliowtd to rtCOI>t r their da!llllgel rtductd by thr proporlion of CiUlolI IIl'glil<'r>et iUribuled to thtm up 10 Ind induding the point where thei r ntgliger>ee constitutts 50 percent 01 tht totil in I two).-paorty situa· tion. Unlike the "not IS grtat as" fonn. undtr the 50 percenl fonn. plaintiffs Cill rtCOYtT t"vtn if thei r negtige~ is ~ual to that of the ddendants. This lonn. the TIlE ALABAMA LAWYER

ITIOIt pOpUiu, iI in effttt in 2t 5tal~. The least favored vemon 01 comparalive fault ;s the slight.,rI,W rule. currently in tffeCl in only two .JIIII~. The rule rtUins the TtC(IYtTy bar 01 contributory ntglijenee unltss the plaintiff can show thit his neglillt~ wu slight and Ihe defendimrs negliger>ee .... IS gross. Tht slight,grou rule iI appeating in tNl il .....auld be 1M ltast radiCiI change to Histing iIIw but would itill lmeliorate Ihe harshness of contributoT}' negliger>ee. Ont of the difficuttiu with the pUTe C(lmparative fault rule is that il /ocusn solely on the hypotheticill 'pb,intif!" without ncogniling thllt once pu re Compirlltive full is embflced, 111 i'1jurtd pl.rties whoK IIl'glillf1lct or ,"ult combined to oontribute to the ;w;xidtnl lrt lUtOITIItiaol1y potential plaintiffs. It i. difficult to jUilify the idoption 01 i system .....tIich pennits parties ...t.o om 95 pel'«ntllt flluil lo hlve IlItir day in court IS plainliffs btCiUSf they are 5 percent flut tlret. Su 8 radlell v. Appalachian PouIer Co., 256 S.E .2d 879, 883 (W.Va. 1979j. The "pure" system encourage. a race to the courthouse. favoring the first tome. Mon impo rla ntly, t he pure form fllVOTS parties who hive incurred Ihe most dimillln, regirdtus of their IImOUnt of faull or neglilltnce. Sft, e.g., Lamborn If. Phil/ips POcirlC Chemical Co .. 89 Wuh.2d 701. 575 P.2d 215 (1978) (pillintiff found 99 percent negli_ g.,nt in elU$ina an ;w;xidtnt bul ......... rdtd II verdict 0( $3.500 b.u.td on ~ <;I S3S0.000), Furt.htrmort.1I pliintiff. who has slLlliined I moderate i'1jury wilh II poIential jury verdict of $20.000 and .... ho is 90 percent fault frte. may be reluctant to lile suit against I defendant who is 90 percent it filult but who has recei~d severe i'1juries &rid whose ast carriu II potential of s.soo,ooo in dI.rmges.. Even lhoua:h tht vtrdiC! is rtductd to $80.000 by the dtfenclann 90 pHalli lautt. it is still br In II:la:SI of the plaintiff's pOten~ rtOJNtTY <;I 518.000. The courts tNt hM; idopttd the purt companolivt ,"ult ,ul, hive nOI discuutd this kind of result. but TIther IHm 10 proceed on the urulittd Wlumption thit ill! pl.rtits wil! be C(Wtrtd by suffident insuranct to pay 1111 the verdicu stemming from a multiparty Kcidtllt. Ad\'O(.I.tet of the purt fonn argue that

il is simpler lind tIIsier to idministe r than irt lilt modified forms. Howtvtr. nperitnce ipptiTi to disprovt this COIltention. S~Tll slltu thlt judidilly idopted pun' tonlJ'OIrativt systems hlve linee ditpbetd thoK S)'SIell"ll with legisl.l.liYtly tnlCled modlrttd comparative SI.Itules. Sft 111. Ann. Stat. 1111. pan. 2-1116 (Smith-Hurd Supp. 1990); towa Code Ann. 668.3 (West 1987). Tht modifitd fonn SHII"II to discourlIIe frivolou$lawsuitJ, encourages settlemenu and minimiles runaway ju r y ~rdicts. In Ihe case of two negligenl putiu, the mutual fur of i JUT}' oulcome pillcing 0IIt p.o.rty·t fautt Ovtr 50 puctnt Ind thereby precluding dam· lilts. -.wighs htllvily ;n fiVO. 0( stttlement. IIndtr the port system. taCh party would <;Ontinut to t,w, knowing that some rtOCIWry would be lVlilllblt rtg&nI. Itss 0( the jury's illocation of fault. This woutd SUrtly inerase coots in an already overbunltntd court S)"$Iem. The modified form likely would gener. Ite fewer counterclaims than the pure form. In a purt comparative fault stale. II badly i'1jured plaintiff, atthough 90 percent al fault. will bring In action ag>ill$t a 10 percent negligenl defendant becillst tht pl.I.lntiff Cill Jtill m:over 10 porcent of hi$ or her damagu. The 10 percent negligent defendllnt. hIving been wed by the plaintiff, IIiturally ...ill countmWm, the 1"$111 likely bting two iII~TI for tach side in virtw.lly <:wry lUi!. The mllnnu in which Regligence is compaortd betwHn the plaintiff lOd t.....a or mort joint tortftlJOTi is very impor_ tanl in II modifitd system. Thtrt art two poMible approaches, the individual rule and the unit or .ggregate rule. Under Ihe individual r ule. the plaintiff can rtCOvtr from II particular defendanl only when the pllintiff$ n"ligence it ttsS thin the fault of the particula r def.ndl.nt. 5« Walker u. KJ'()ger Groar, & &Icitw Co.. 2a \\"os. 519, 252 N.W. 721 (1934). Under the ~Ie rult, pl.I.in_ liffs Ir~ entitled to .eCOWr so long IS their fiull islw thin the bult of 1111 thr deftndllnts combined. See, t.g .• Ark. SULAnn. 116-64· 122 (1991). In multiple defendant casts. the ,ndividult Tute pre5t~s the principle of nonliability for any defendant len at fault than the plaintiff. The individual rule reduces the prospect of r&OWf}' for

Jan ..... ry 1993 I 57

grossly fault)' plaintiffs, but an innocent plaintiff still can rttO'Jer from a ddendant minimally at faull In an aggr'lIi!t~ rule case, a marginally negligent ddendant will bt forced to pay damages to a mort negligent plaintiff. Further, the coexi"tence of the 199relli!te principle of comparison with joint and sever~llillbili ty Sl'TVU a, an incentive for negligent plaintiffs to join 'deep pocket" defendant! only marginally in~olv.d in the incident.

Joint and .5e\'eralliability No maUu what form of comparative fault is ~dopted, the Court mwt M(:ide wheth.r joint and several liability will bt retained. J)(fense la~rs for years ha\'e cried that joint and several liability is patently unfai r. Though one might npect that joint and sev... l liability would bt abolished u a matter of cou~ with the adO(ltion of comparat'''" rault. many argue emphaticaJl)' that jOint and ,evfral liability should be retained. In the lUi few years, the law of joint and , ..... ral liability h.is been abolished Or modir.ed in at least 37 of the 46 compar· ative faull states. S« Mutter. Mooing /0 Com{X1roliue fleglig<mce In on Ero of Tori Rdorm: DecisiQ;u for T",,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 57 Tenn. L. Rev. 199.304 (1990). Many ju risdictions have recognized that joint aJId several lillbility is inconsistent with a comparative fault system and essentially ha .... eliminated joint and severalliahilit)' entirely. Other jurisdictions have abol· ished joint and sevenl liability in all ta.<-t$ except tho5e in which UN! pl.1intiff is found not to be at fault. Still other jurisdictions have abolished joint and leveral liability for a defendant whrue fault is btlow a certain th~hold. Others haVl': formul.1ted schelOt. model. d after the Unifo rm Comparative Fa ult Act, which retains joint and several liability in the first instance. but reallocatn uncoll.ctibl. damagt5 among all parti.. at fault. including the plaintiff. Some jurisdictions have enacted schemes dis· tinguishing betWttn «onomie and non· economic 1055 o r ot h er simi In distinctions. Although the .... riations on the aboli· tion of joint and sevenl liability are widespread. they represent a consensU5 that joint and several liability should not couist equally with comparati,.. fault.

58 1 lanua')' 1993

The rationale behind comparative fault is that li"bilit)· should be iSSfS$td occord· inllto the relative fault of the parlies. Joint and several liability makes each joint tortf.. sor liable for tht tnti .. amount of pl.1intiff, inju')', relli!rdless of the amount of fault assessed to that defend.nt. "Since the doctrine i, antithetical to the buic premise of the comparati,," fault concept - that liability for damages will be borne by those who,t fault caused it in proportion to thfir re,pective fault - logic compells1 its abolition." t:ilbacher. C&nporatiW! Fault and the NOll-Party Tor/feasor, 17 Ind. L Rev. 903, 907 (19M). If liabilit)' is to be ass ....d according to fault. then no party should be held responsible for more than its proportionate share of fault. To hold otherwise i, to favor 0,," wrongdoer O\o"tr anoUN!r. The advocates of comparative fault maintain that it is unfair to place the burden of a 1055 caUltd by the fault of t,,"O partie.! on one alone (th. plaintiff) .•special ly when one's fault may be relatively minor in comparison to the fault of the other. A principle of 10.. apportionment that allows plaintiffs to r«Over despite their fault should al50 serve to insulate defen· dants from liability for 1= to the pl.1in· tiff attributable to the negligence of mother defendant. Allowing joint and several liability in a COmparatM fault system leads to results thai clearly are unjust and incompatible with the comparative fault rationale. See. e.g .. Wall Disney World Co. v . l-t-"ood. 515 So. 2d 198 (Fla, 1987!(Plain. tiff 14 percent at f.ult. Visne)' 1 percent at fault and plaintiffs finance 85 percenl at fault. but Disne)' held responsible for 86 percent 01 plaintiffs damages b«aUlt fiance was immune from ,uit). If liabilit)' is to be as,essed according to fault. whether a defendant can actually pay ~ judgment should not be considered in ass.l5ing liability. The application of joint and several liability in a comparati"e fault system destrO»s the asserted fairness of a fault·based recovery and ,hifts the focus from liabilily according to fault to liability accordinll to colleclability. Adler. Allocation of Resporui· billtJl After American Motorcycle Associa/ion v, Superior C!Jurl, 6 Pept>. L Rev. I, 5 (1978). Such a policy is fundamentally unfair. As the KaIUolS Supreme Court ob.ltf\"td in Brown v. Xeill. 224

Kan . 195,580 P.Zd 867, 874 (1978). "[tlhere is nothing inhorently fair about a defendant who is 10 percent al fault paying 100 perc.nt ofth~ loss, and there is no social policy that should compel defendants to pay more than their fair share 01 the loss." Few courts have set forth any reasoned analysis in deciding whelher joint .. nd sew ral liabilit)' should be rellined in a compa rative faull system. None of the justifications cited by the few courts that have examined this issue and reLlined join t and ,"veral liability wi thsland meanini/ful scrutiny. The courts rationalize that the plain· tiffs injury is indivisible because each defendant's negligence cawed the enti re injury. This ignores the fact Ihat the plaintiffs negligence also caused the entire injury. [f indivisibility is no longer a bar to plaintiffs recove ry. then it should not bt wed to deny modification of joint and se.... ralliability. Comments. Where is Ihe Principle or Fairness in Jom! and Several Liability _ Mwoari Slops Shorl of a Compreh<m.i"" Com· para!i"" Faafl System, 50 Mo. L. Rev. 601. 617 (19851. II the Court ampl! III< ability of the fact·findinll process to appOrtion degrees of negligence then the foundation of joint and several liability, the previously assumed inability to apportion fault among torlfeasors, has been eliminated. America" Malorqlde A<sn v. Superior Courl. 65 Cal. Aw. 3d 694. 135 Cal. Rptr. 497 (1977), rev'd 20 Cal. 3d 578,146 Cal, Rptr. 182.578 P.2d 899 (1978). Somt courts have suggested that b«aUlt p~intiff hu only violated a duty to protect him,elf and the def.ndant. ha,.. violated a duly to pre".nt harm to oth .... UN! defendants' conduct is some· how more culpable than islhe plaintiffs. How",.. r, thtre is no qualillli~ difference in the culpabili ty of thf parlie,' conduct simply by reHOn of one bting a pl.1intiff and the others being defendants.. The 1abel"plaintifr does not change the nature of a party's conduct. A plaintiffs conduct often cr. attl a tnmendous risk of harm to others. Sometimes the con· duct fortuit0U5l~ does not result in any inju,), to anjlOne flSl'. but Olh.r time. plaintiff s conduct. 'n fact. does cause inju')' to on<: or more of the defendants Or to non·partitl, If a plaintiffs conduct is less culpable than the deftndants·. the

THE illiI.IIAMA LAWYER

jury will Use," fault accordingly. but thu i5 n ot s ome thing that shou ld requi re One defendant to pay all the damages caused by all the defendants. To hold that the mere fact lhal a party is the plaintiff makes lhat party's conduct less culpable than the defendants' conduct simply encourages a race to the court·

So"", courts reason that joint and 'I'Veralliability should be reUined to aMure lhat injured plaintiffs are compensated lor th eir injuriu. However. the court canOOl assume that each defendant will 001 be responsible for his or her appor· t ioned share 01 a judgment. Certainly, th ..e occa,ional ly will be an insolwnt defend,,"t. but the majority of dolen_ dants. through insurance or otherwise. are able to pay their just debts. The fact that plaintiff. occasionally may b. unable to collect a portion of thei. damages, is an insufficient basis for shifting the responsibility for one delendanfs lla· bility to another defendanl. "Betweon Ih e plaint iff and one defendant. the plaintiff bears the risk 0( the defendant being insolwnt: on what basis does the ri,k shift if the .. are t\>" defendants and one is insolvent?" Bar/ell u. New Nexico W~lding Supply, Inc.. 98 N.M. 152, &46 P.2d 579. 585 (N""'. App.) cert. denied 98 N.M. 336. 648 P.2d 794 (1982). If the risk 0( insolwncy &hilts when th.re are multiple defendants. the court is determining liability not on the basis of blam~.thine .. but on the financial conditions of the defendants. Ball. A

Reexaminalion of Joi,,1 ami Sewra! Liabilily

und~r

a Comporali" Fault Sys·

lem. 18 SI. Mar;'", W. 891 (19117). "If ..." ar. eo"r 10 achie-" a just and e<luitable

tort syst. m. we must predicate a party's liability upon hi' or h.. blameworthiness. not upon his or he. solvency o. a codefendant's susceptibility to suit." Wall Disney Worfd. 515 So. 2d at Z05·6 (McDonald. J.• dissenting). The final cited .ationale for retaining joint and sewral liabili~ is slare deciis. II stilre d«isis does not prewnt the abolilian of cont ributory negligenco. it should 001 prownt the abolition 0( joint and sewral liability. It has long been rft:Ggnized that the slart! decisis rule i. only a start ing point. Ex parle Morek. 556 So. 2d 375 (Al3. 1989). A change in the law that resulted in the dewlopment of the joint and ",,'eral rule dictates a THE AL.ABAMA L.AWYER

change in the rule itself. If the Court adopts a comparative lault system then it i, recognizing the ability of the fact find· e. to appOrtion laull. If the fact find .. can apportion fault. it can appo.tion damages. The ralional e that damage, cannot be apportioned. which has been the justification for joint and ",,-eralli.· bility. is no longer valid. Neither rU$OO nor the rationales cit.d by other courts can justify the .etention of joint and sewralliability in a comparative fault system']f the Court adopts comparative fault and the rational. that liability should be assessed according to fault. then joint and severalliabilit~ must be abolished or, at the vel'}' least. modified. If liability is to be assessed according to fault. then no party can be held responsible for more than his o. her proportionate share of the faull.l'aimess and equity dictate that each party be responsible for thos e damages attributable to his or her fault. and 001/1 for those damages.

Problems presented by abse nt or immune culpable partiu Anothu troublesome probl.m and one closely related to the joint and sew.al liabili ty issue is the Question of whal treatment should be given to tortfeaso" whose fault cont ributed to cause the injury but who are not parties to the suit. for "<ample. what happens if the plaintilf Stllles with one 0( the parties at fault o. chaoses not to join. Or cannot obtain jurisdiction owr. one of the par· ties at fault? What hap~ns if one of the parti.. at fault is immu"" from suit or has a valid statute of limitations dof.n .. to the plaintiffs claim? The only fair and equitable means of dealing with each of these problems consistent with the rationale behind comparative fault is to asses.> the fault 0( all parties whos.e lault con· tributtd to cause the injul'}'...gardlus 0( whether they are or can be made par· ties to the suit. As one commentator has

To the extent that a given legal system ignores the fau lt of any tortfeasor. and . hilts the financial burden from one culpable person to another, the fundamental principle of comparati," lault is com· promi5ed. Thus. the manne, in

which a given comparative fault .\)'Item add~ the issue of allocation of lault and responsibility fa. damage, to the non·party tort· feasor provides the measure of fairness of that system of loss distribution. Eilbacher. Comporali"" Faull and Ihe Non ·Parly Torlfeasor . 17 Ind. L. Rev. 903 (1984).

The need 10. such a rule i5 obvious in ~s

in which the plaintiff chooses not to join a culpable party or allows the statute of limitations to run as to a cui. pable party. Certainly, if the plaintiff chooses not to proceed against a party who is partlally at fault for the plaintiffs damages, the other de/end.nts should not be penalized. Plaint ills can chao.. 001 to sue potentially liable parties. but in SO doing. they should not be able to manipulate the principles of comparatillt fault effectively to shift the fault of one tortleasor to the other tortftaso". No. should plaintiffs be alio-.."d to shift the fault of a tortfeasor .... ho has a statute of limitation5 defense to another tortfrasor. "A defendant should not be penalized for a plaintiffs lack of diligenct in identify. ing and 5uing each torlltaso •. II dili· gence is to b. encouraged, so a, to .chie-'\' troe apportionment and liability acco.ding to fault, the burden 01 loss must fall on that party .... ho determines who should be defendants in the ,uil." Id.at912. SOm ..... hat more troublesome is tht Cast in which a dd.ndant cannot be se!"\led Or is beyond the jurisdiction of the court because inconsistent results could OCcur if the plaintiff is lorced to pursue some tortfeaso .. in a ..,pa.ate action. Another difficult problem is pre· sented by immune tortfeasors. Howewr. the fault of all l:Ulpabl. parties must be considered or the principles and ratiorulie behind camparatillt fault art defeat· ed. "11 would be unfortunate to permit the fear of occasional inconsistencies in loss distribution to prevent the adopt ion of a syste m of spreading loss which wou ld in most cases abolish the Archaisms of our present common I.w rule, of negligence ." Goldenberg and Nicholas. Comparative Liability Among Joinl Torlfeasors: The AfIermalh ofU v. Yel/()IJl CAb Company. 8 U. West LA L. January 1993 / 59

Rev. 23. 52·5.3 (l976). The .tlliing lorlfea.or presents Ihe additional queslion of whelher the plain· tiff'. daTll/lge. shoutd be reducw by the Sl!lIling tortfeaoor', percentage of fault Or by lhe amount of the Sl!ulemenl. Th. ralionale behind comparalive fault die· tatu Ihat Ihe plaintiff'. damag .. be reduced by the Sl!lIling tortiea.ror'. percentalle of fault and not by lhe amounl of the Sl!ltIement. A COIltl'll!), role would allow the plaintiff effectivtly 10 'hift the loss to the party best able to pay by set· tling with tho other partin. Mort(M'r, the contrary rule would re.u lt in the non·seUling defendants baring the ri.k that the Sl!Uling parties misevaluatw the cne. II plaintiff maxu the d.d.ion to settle with one tortfeuor. the plain tiff .hould bear the risk lhat that Sl!lIlement TIl/Iy be Ie.. (0. more) than the .. Uling tortlea.ror·s percentage of plaintiff. dam · ~. It i. far more f'luitabl. for plaintiff. 10 bear the ri.k of their ""'n failure to accurately evalU3te their case. than it is fo r the remai ning defendant. to bear that ri.k. The percentage reduction method is the only fair and equitable method of accounting for the settling Iortieasor. In lumma ry . in order to effectuate fully the goals ofa compal'lltive fault '1'$' Itm. the fault of all parties to the occur· rence mu.t be con.idered when .nocating fault. The plaint iff'. damag<ls then mu>t be rwucw by the percentage of faull of all non·party lortfeasors.

Other issues hsumplion of Risk Abolition of con· tributory negligence do.. not nectMarily dictate abolition of the assumplion of lhe ri.k defense. Assumption of ri.k and contributo!), negligence embody di.tin· gui,habl. concepts. ,usumption of ri.k employs a .ubjeclive standard to asseu whether a particular plaintiff appreciated a risk prior 10 voluntarily proceeding to encounter it. Contributory negligence utiliu~ an objecti"e ",aoonableneSl criterion. The Alahama Supreme Court hao steadfa.tly recognized Ihe distinction. See. e.g .. Slade o. City of Monl(lOmtJ'g. 577 So. 2d 887 (Ala. 1991). Further. assumption of r;.k r..1s on different theoretical grounds Ihan does comparati~ fault. 11 does not connict with the policies underlying comparative &0 1 Janua!), 1993

fault. nor do", it. application circum. ~nt the comparative fautt enactments. Cont ributory negligence rest. on the plaintiffs fail ure to uerd~ reasonable care. It mea.5ur .. thi: plaintiff. conduct objecth.. ly. against that of the "reason· able person." Assumption of ri.k don not employ any .uch notion of fault or negligence. but r.ther. rest. on the plaintiffs informed decision to encounter the risk created by the defen. dan t ·. dangerous conduct. Whue assumption of ri.k i. applicable. the plaintiff. although able to avoid the risk of proceeding. h.. made a con.ciou •. informed choice to accept lhat risk and to proceed in hann's way. Ila"ing made that consdou> choice. it il neither illogi· cal nor inequitable to requi'" the plain· tiff 10 accept the consequence •. which 10 easily could have been avoided. Intent/ono/, R«kle$I, Willful Qlld Won/on Conduct. Cenerally, campara· Ii,.. fault ju ri.dictions ha"" refu..,d to apply comparative fault principles to ;ntentional conduct. lI(M·e"l'T. a number of courts ha,.. detennined that comparative (ault .hould be applied to all fonns of aggravated conduct .hort of intention_ al injury. Emphasizing that aggravated negligence concepu wue develo~d to ameliorate the harsh common law bar of contributory negligence, the .. court. reason that the ad"ent of comparative fault make. such concepls superfluou •. Se •. e.g .. SO'"""-'Qn ~. AI/rn!. 112 Cal. App.3d 71 7. 725. 169 Cal. Rptr. 441. 446 (1980). Since the harsh .. e.. of contributOry negligence will be eliminated with Ihe adoption of comparati~ fault, the rationale for rdu.ing to apply the defense to claims of rtdttes.s.,..., willful_ neSS and wantonness no tong. r el i.ls. Laufenberg. ComparoliUf! Negligence Primt>'. Defense Research Institute. Inc. (1975). intuoc/ion of Compo rotict Foult with Siotulorll Enoc/me,,/J. When longstanding tort doctrine. are abrog!lt · ed. th e new doctrines establiShed inevitably will ronOict in some respect.! with .tatutory enactment. premi ..d upon those longotanding doctrines. Ab0lition of contributo!)' neglillence in favor of comparative negligenc~ would be no tlI"ption. Sui bdl ddt"u, Although the majority of .tates. including Alabama. do not recognize the seat belt defense. a

number of state courts ha,.. held recentI~ that the principles of comparative fault require that the ju!)' be allO"ol'W to COIl$ider a motOriS!"1 nonuse of a proteclive .afet~ device in appOrtioning dam · ages. See generally Annol.. Nonuse of Automobile Sf'Olb~lts (I' £videnO! of ComporolitJl! Negligence. 95 A.L.R.3d 239 (1919). Cuef! $fow/e. Some have argued thai the adoption of comparative fault should impliedly repeal the guest ,tatute. While the guest .tatute in a comparati'" faull case could produce ..... me unkind re.ults. no court in any .tate has held that the adoption of comparativ. fault ha. impliedly rt"Jlfalw a guest .tatute. Th~ guest statute remains viable until .pecificall~ repealed by the legislature Or overturned by the Alabama Supreme Court on constitutional grounds. 0tJrw nlarlmrnts. In ..",.ral .talut.. the legi.latur. has made specir.c r.ndingo with rega rd to the cont . ibuto!)' negli gence defense. See. e.g., Ala. Cooe 25·6-1 (1975) (EmpIOJler·. Liability Acl): Ala. Code 32-5-222 (1975) (child pas..,nger reslraint.): Ala. Code 21 -7.7 (1975) (rights of blind persons nol u.ing cane Or guide clog). In add ition, the Worker'. Compensation Act i. also premised upon the Quid pro QUO of not holding employw;' contributorily negligenL Adoption of comparat;'.. fault will ha,.. .., impact on th"e and other statutory enactments Ihal are premi.ed upon contributor)' negl illence principl... NegligenO! of Childr.... In the past many categori.s of plaintiff•.• uch .. infant.!. children. and aged or incapaci· tated people. have bttn held either inca· pable of contributory n~gligenc. or at least capable only of some dimini.hed form of contributory negligence. The comparative system may permit a more ..alistic evaluation. for example, of a child'. (M'n ... ponsibility for hi. Or her inju!), and of the defendant'. responsibility. For ellllmple, the a~ and experience of the child can be considered in determining whether that child wa. in fact negligenl. If so. the.., wnt faclor.; again can be ronsiderw in comparing the negligence of the minor plaintiff with lhat of the adult defendant. The capacity of the ch ild is thus ~ for e.!.ablishing ....ilich .tandard of care appliu to Ihe minor plaintiff and in apportioning faull. See Blahnik v. D<lx, n Wi •. 2d 67, 125 THE AL-"6AMA LAWYER

NW.Zd 364 (1963). Res Ipsa i.Qqu;(ur. A part of the elas· sic res ipsa loquitur doctrine is a O"«luirement that the plaintiff bt free of contributory neglig.nc • . Comp",ati~ fault obviously will modify this rule. SK. e.g. , Turk v.1I. C Prange Co.. 18 Wis. 2d 547, 119 N.W.2d 365 (1963) . Where a modified form of comparative faull is in effect. such as in Colorado, res ipsa can be aWlied since the jury cou ld thai plainlifrs "negligence was not as greal [and l ... the e$$\!nlial elemen" of res ipsa were tslablished.· Corrkm It. We$/·

r,nd

inghouse lileelric Corp., 599 P.2d 953 (Colo.App. 1979). CQUnten:IQims. AdOptioo of compara· tiVE faull likely will dramatically increase the number of counterclaims filed. £ven if the defendant clurly is at fault in causing the accident and the plaintiffs fault is relatively minor. defendants can virtually always counterclaim seeking to r~r 5OTTII' portioo of their own dam. ages. The pOSSibility of both the plaintiff and the defendants recovering, presents the additional problem of whether a set· off should be made. This problem would nol arise in mod ified comparatiVE jurisdictions where a party can rttOYtr ooly if his negligence is I.,s than thaI of the other pa rty. Sel--offs have the virtue of bting easy to administer and to apply. but some courts haw felt thai they lead to int<juitable result.. in .ome ci rcum stances. See Heft & Heft. Comparaliue

Negligence Manual, §A.220 0978). Where bolh parlies are insured. fo r example. a set-<off result.. in both insuren saving money and bot h claimants recovering len than the damagn to which they 3fe otherwile entitled. Refusal to ap pl y set ·offs abo can have equally inequitable resul". For ~mple. if one party is sol"ent and the other is not and no set·o(f is allowed, the solvent party will pay the entire amount of its liability with littl. hope 0( rWlVtring it.. judgment from the insolvent pa r ty. Some courts haw refused to apply set· off. in ca... in which the part ies are insured. Su. e.g .. Jess v. Herrman", 26 Cal. 3d 131. 161 Cal. IIptr. 87. 61}§ P.2d 208 (1979) . C.mfliw of InINeI I. [f comparative fau lt is adOpt<:<l. representation of more than one dtfendant by one defeme attorney may become obsolele. It will almost always raise. connict of internt bteause

THE AIABA..'tA U.\wER

it would always be in One defendant's best intertst to attempt to increase lhe percmlages 0( fault to be assessed 10 the other defendant.., as w~1I as the pla intiff. Conclusion [f the Supreme Cou r t of Alabama decides 10 adopt lhe doctrine 0( compar· ative fault in the IViliiarm case, lik. Pan· dora's Box 00"" opened. it is difficult to envision the chaos which may ultimately emerge. It is impossible to predict the endless stream of "shadowy shapes" of issues that may ultimately be unleashtd once the lid is opened. Only a few have been touched upon he rein. Additional issue. include the p roper pleading of comparative fault. special verdicls, whether the jury should be told about the impact of the ".,dict. prospective ve rsus retrospective application. the dfect upon phantom v"hicl. uninsured

motorist cases, and the impact of com· parative faul t on indemnity and ,ubrogolion claims. The ooe good gift of hope allowed Pan· dora to survive her misery. PerhapS. the hope of a fai r and equitable tort system will give us the strength to endure the initial chao. that will corne to bear if the lid on the comparative fault Pandora's box is lifted . • _

.... All. , Smllll

_10.

00b<;w"" . . . _

& -.on.

dT_ _

Io. _ d "'..." d _ ' i1ft2 11'_ d ' " ~

'9!I5gt_d"'~0I

_K ._.. , ___,_.

"-'-"" ScI»oI 01 ' -

_ I t . Pitt. lOll.

so-.. ,_

flO< """' .. _ _

_ CoIo\IO n , gee ... flO< .... _ _ .om c...-w.o ScI»oIoI ' - '" ' \1811. $"10 _ _

& _ _ _ _ _ _ .... <loti< 10 " ' - . . _ ,,",,* w _ J ' . d ....

_-....Cw1.

NOTICE OF ELECTION NOli« i, giwn herewith pursuant 10 theA/aN"", Stal" Bar Ruk<

Gwornriw Ekelion

oIPnsidml~"", and CommiMioon.

PRESIDENT·ELECT Tho Abbama S!.ol. Bar will .lect • pr ... idont-.I«t in 1993 to ..."me the p""i· denCY of Ihe bar in J"ly 1994. Any c.ndidat. m",t b. a memb.r in good ' tanding on March 1. 1993. Pttition. nomin.ling . Clndid.ot. mu.t b.., Ihe signat"", 0/ 2S mombt .. in good ,tanding of tho Alabama Stato B.. and M "".iwd by the otcr<tary 0/ the .tal. bar

on or bofo .. Marcn I. 1993. Any Clnd; · rial< for thi. off"", . 1... mU$1 ' ubmit wilh

Iho """,;nating pe-lition. block . nd whit< pMI"lItlph . nd bi"llraphiClI d.>ta 10 be pubtWotd in the MoyAlabama UJtcyn. Ballots will bt ..... iltd bolWe<n May 15 and )0,," I and mU$t bt rtai"u.I state bar h.. dQuart ... by 5 p.m. on Joly U,

COMMISSIONERS Bar commission . .. "'ill be .1«Itd by thoso IIW)" " "'ith their princip.>] r>ffk .. in the following d",ui\>: 8th; 10th. p\oc •• no. 4. 7 and R.... m.r Cut· off; II Ih ; 131h. place no. 1: 17th; 18th; 1!fth; 21st; 22nd; :!:ltd, p\oc. no. 1; 30th, 3l"; 33rd; 34th; 35th; 361h .nd 40th . Addition.l commissione .. ",ill bo ol«ltd in these circuit< /", ~h 3(l(I mombtn of the .tal< b.or wilh pTindp.1 offi"u th ... in . The n,,,, commission" po,ition, will b. dol.rmin«! by a UIISW 0/1 M.m" 1. 1993 and vacanci .. c..tified by tho st< .. tary on M>rch IS. 1993. Tho I.rms 0/ my incumbent oommis-

• ........ a", r<taiTltd. All subsoq",nt lorms will be for th..., )-'<II> N"",inalions may bt made by I"'tilion mtrnbo .. in btaring !hot .ignat~ res 0/ good nanding wilh pri nci",,1 offic .. in !hot circuil in whi<h !hot ol.ction will be held or by the Clndid.>t,·, "";tt.n d, d .... lion 0/ c.m,hd.>C)'. Either muot bo reuiwd by lht ""rtUry no lot .. tIWI 5 p.rn. on !hot lut !'Tidily in April (April 30. 199.1). Balk>u wil l bo p"'""r<d and "",iltd \0 members bel",.. n M.y 15 .nd J~no 1. 1993. Balk>u mU$t be vQlfd and rtlomod by 5 p.rn. on the .. r:ond T'undioy in J",," (Ju,," 8. 1993) to ....1< bar I-...dquart ....

r""

January 1993/ 61

RECENT DECISIONS By DAVIDS. BI'RNE,JR. =dTERRY A. SIDES

ALABAMA SUPREME

COURT - CRIMINAL Double je0gerdy-c:ritice' 81'\111'515; proof of conduct

Sia/"" v. Siale. 26 ABR 5048 (August 14. 1992). The Double Jeopardy Clal15e of the United Slates Conslitul;(}n and

tilt' Alabama Constitution bars any subuquenl proucution OIl which the GO'I. ommenL to nlablish an "ssential

etement of an ofIe flU charged in Ihat prosecution, will prove conduct Ihat consti t utes an offense for which the dd. ndanl has already tHee" prosecuted. In Februar}' 1990. Staten was convicttd in the Guntersville Municipal Court

or assault in the third deg" •. The wa.-

rant charged Stalen with causing physical injury to Betty Saint b}' hitting her and trying to dose the trunk lid of an automobile On her. In April 1990. ba.N on the earlier incident. the Marshall County Grand Jury charged Staten with attempting to kidnap Saint in the first degree b).' abducting her with tht inlenl 10 physiCIIlly injure hor. Stalen pled guilly 10 stcond degre.

T. rry A'.A

-_. J"", "'"" - . """

«lW"J"""" -...ono._"" •• "'_01 ........... · ... d_.,., d ....

"-"' d_o .......·

... ~iI . _d .... ~ ....... i · l ..... d

........ c-.r'...". ~ .-

62 1 January 1993

kidnapping. bul reserved Ih. righl 10 appeal the trial court"s denial of her motion to dismiss based on the 8fQUnd of double jeopardy. The court of crimi· nal appeals affirmed her conviction. The Alabama Supreme Court granted certioraJi to consider Stalon's claim that Ihe trial judge erred by nol vacating her attempled kidnapping conviction on the ground of double j~pardy. Specifically. Stalen argu ed th.1 Ihe Stale had 10 prove conducl for which she had .had» b«n prostculed in order to emblish an elStntial element of the aUempted kid· napping charge. and. thus. hu convic· lion was barred by Ihe double jeopardy proYisions of the Alabama and United States constilutions. The sup~me court, in an opinion aUlhored b>' Justice Sho~s. reversed the conviction and reno dt~d judgment in fawr of Staten. The U.S. Sup~me Court. in Grmi" O. U!rbin. 495 U.S. 508 (1990). held that a subsequent prosecution must do more t",," pass the etements test under Blockburger O. United Slole5. 284 U.S. 299 (1932). The Suprl'me Court stated in pertinent part as follows: ITlhe Doubl e Jeopardy Clause bars any subsequenl proseculion in which the government. to establish an "un· lial element of an offon •• charged in that proseculion. will prove conducl that consitutes an offense for which the defendant has already been prosecuted. This is not an ·a.:tual evidence' Or 'same evidence' test. The critical inquiry is whal lhe Siale will prot'e, nollhe e"'·· den", the State ",·iII use to prove Ihol conduCI. While an ~ssential elemenl of aUempted kidnapping is intent to injure and not actual injury to the victim. the State in Ihi. e.... presented evidence of Saint's actual injury in order to .lIow the fact· finder 10 infu Staten's intent in trying to kidnap Saint. The State prowd Staten's intent to injure Saini by showing the following conduct on her part: pushing the victim into the trunk of the car. trying to close lhe trunk lid. stating to the victim Ihat she IStatenl would

"take off md kill ISaintl: and. finally, hitting the victim md tetting her to stay in the trunk. This conduct constitutes an offenst that Staten had alread» b«n convicted of in the municipal court. spedficall y auautt in the third degree. and a.:cording 10 the doctrine of Crady O. U!rbin. the admission of evidence of this conduct is barred by the doubte jeopardy provisions of both the United States and Alabama Corutitulioos.

Summary- te.timon, .. Iatlng to buslne . . . .cords subject to Be.t Evidence Rul. and det.ndent's ,Ight to ••amln. und ....'lng documents Walker O.

Slat~.

26 ABR 5254 (Augw;t

21. 1992). Walker "'... the manager of a rntaurant located in Saratand and was charged with the embezztement (thetl in the first degree) of S9.1Il0 from the restauranrs owners. During the tri.t. the State questioned the bwkkeeper about the restaurant records for the first ~ix months of 1990. The bookk.. per te,tified that the $9.100 was missing during this time period. The Stale Ihen attempted to question the bookkeeper about the second six month. of 1990 and the regularity of deposits after Walkers tuminalion as manager of the restaurant. !kcaus. the bookkeeper's knowledge was based upon his examination of thl' restauranrs retards. the defense objected to the testimony under the "!kst Evidence Rule". More specifically, Watker contended that the bookkeeper', sum· mary testimony of whal Ihe restaurant records showed should have been precluded unless the defendant was given an opportunity to examine the records The evidence was without dispute that the rtcords had TWltr been made available to Walker before trial notw ithstanding the State's obligalion 10 produce .11 documentary evidence for the defendanrs irnpection as a part of the court', standard prelrial discovery order . (<Amtinuedon page (4) THE ALABANA LAWYER

Alabama Law on

* a cases, • caid

nme:.

run 10 -.11 ~ rn:tnan

reports, ~ tnd ~ ~.1e:9'i

aucWlth _

' - on

DiK Id<.a KCDI'ds.)& ~\QI ""'" sard1 wordIlor.., Ie:9'i CClI'«;lI,"'" 1\1*.... ' on DIM: co i ........ <:lie Oil. .,.., "..-plIO the case d\QI ctoc~ 1htn.)QJ C6l broodenClI'Wl'OW\QI-.1I ClIcd: for ~C8IeI

___

.kw~

Alabama Law on Point,

, ',b, ....... on DIM: ~""""")CIU 10 ·cu.~·_IoanC8lel~d).

To _ I t c pro;IIC .... j(lO,I rw:e:I.l'>Pt

t:nd co ~o.dm, W*8)QJ 1'I'0OI: Irre.

tQUPleofw.dl~tnd

.,. "Ib ' ....... on

Oioc ~ INd>ts Itc U _ of<Xooo:lno loan Itc-... s..:-n. Cart(...-a 19541 can ofCM ~ (wee 19(9)tn:lCartof ~(wa 19M~""'Cfl'CO'J1)Kl, odI<crUrlCd ~ SVRCm Ih!t.....".,. ""'" \QI1IM(DI~)peROMIcorrp.U1

Alabama Law on Budgd. tcl.lme ~

0;0,.,.,,,,,,,, rOfW1S,"'"

~~ I.(ldDIot dllaft

ncb:Iod

., •'Ib_ ...... on DiK'f ....... 1lb5ui!XD, pna:a]tat

Contact your Mkhie representative in Alabama today for a no-obligation demonstration~""""11 8OOIS4H6 r.~ ~-4Ill

QaII Thelo'd'of;~~ . 1OIWSd· 1 115 1O~ \'O.I1eeo:

TIlE

51SO - . tnd 51i5' • mcrc!!.

-- ---

..... a ""'"'" rnooi<es: • easy 10 9"1 thr; ""'" 01'1 ya.I de'" .,.., inIO

...

\'0.1 ne>¢ all!

Publisher of the Code of ~

In a per curiam decision. the Supreme Court of Alabama reversed. The supreme court. citing C. Gamble. McElrov 's Alab.:lma f;~ideru:". made the following critiC/lI ooS':'rvalion about the !lui Evi dence Rule: It sometimes occurs that a fact to be prwtn requires an inspedion and com· pilation of nume , ous and v(liuminou$ documents. such that inspection and compilation by the judge or jury at the trial would be unreasonabl., impracticable. Or impossible. Under the~ circum,tance,. a qualified witn~S$. who hn

made an examination of such doeu -

menu, may state the result of hi, com-

judge clots not have discl"l'tion to wai ..... this requirement. The purpase of giving the opposing party an opportunity to examine the records i. to enabl e the opposing party to attack and disprove t he summary tutimany by showing inaccu racies. ambiguities. etc .. if they should exist. In the case sub judice, Walker never had the opportuni ty to inspect the underlying restaurant records for the second si x months of !990. nor did Walker ha"" reaSOn to expect that the State ...."Quld . Ikit the bookkeeper's sum · mary t .. timony a.s circum.tantial ev;dence of Walker's guilt.

putations there/rom if. but only il. the documents are made available to the opponent for hi. inspection. The witnts.. therdor •. may testify to hi •• um·

One more time a Sa tson reversal

mary of voluminou. record. without having to produc e the origina l or account for their~. C. Camble. McElr<JJ/'s Alabama Evidence, ~220.01 (4th ~:d.I99I). The opposing party's opportunity to examine the records that al"l' the subject of the witness's suml"O/lry testilTlOllJ' is a cond ition precMent to the admissibility 01 the summary testimony, and jh., trial

Yeltkr v. Siale. 26 ABR 5076 (Augu.t 14, 1992). reider's conviction for bur· glary, sodomy and ra~ was r(versed because of the failul"l' of a Montgomery County ~rost<:utor to follow the clearly· establishtd pl"l'cedent in Ex parle Bird. 594 So.2d 676 (Ala. 1991). In a stinging opinion. Justice Adams critically noted that the prosecution used 24 of i\.5 32 p<.'remptory strikes to

r-::==:;;;;;~;~~:;;;~;;~====;-l

PROBATE BONDS COURT BONDS

bu,

'K'" the

S t ay of

you need a bond Just Co))

Jack Mc Cam Mickie Mc Carn Edwards For Professioflal Smlce 251-4062 FAX: 328·0247

64 1 January 1993

I<eoIty Insurooce Agency . Inc. P.O. 80X 56 t7S lIUmlngham. AlcIbcm">:l352SS

251-1002 TAll

,"m",,'<loo • jury pan el. pu rsuant to Batson. the prosecution offered various explanations for the prosecution's strikes. The supreme court's opinion noted the re markabl. rtse mblance of the Yelde. facts to tho. e pre · sented in Ex poriI' Bird. In Bird, al though black ~nil"l' members comprised 36 percent of the venire. the percent · age of black jurors actually sute d on the jury represented only 8 p<.'rcent of the tri.l jury. ld. at 680. The State. in Yelder. pros~cti~

Bonds

_~)

,,"'W,"' <",

defendant's t imely objec t ion to the

Bonds

remove 24 ofremem the 27black veni

J2~47

~d 85 percent of i\.5 peremptory ehal· lenges. that is. 17 Or 20 .trikes. to eliminat . 89 perc e nt of the black wniremembers. As the supreme court pointed out in Bird, the sheer .....eight of statistics such as th .. ~ rai,es a strong inference of racial discrimination requiring clear and cogent explanat ions by the State in rebuttal. Howewr. as noted by Justice Adams, "InSltad of such explanation •. heM""""r, tho$e proffered in this Ca.:Ii' virtually pa rall el the whimsical. ad hoc excuses ...-.: rejected in Bird." 1'01l0win8 a review of th e rtaso", given by the State in justification of the use of ;\.5 peremptory, the Court stated: 'We are compelled t(l conclude that the explanation. advanced by the State for i\.5 challenges of these ~ni~mem· bus represent no more than a pr.text for racial discrimination." Justice Adams concluded his opinion by noting: ' We regret that the conduct of the pro.ecution ha •. because of actions takrn on the ba.sis of race. once again necessitated a retrial. thus creating an additional strain on the judicial and economie ~SOUrces of this state. At the present time. 'b lacks are su ving in substantial numbers <IS jurors and mtting out stiff sentencu. including death. This is because. although in some instillc •• blacks may be the perpetrators of the crime. in even more substantial numbers. thq allO the victims of crime." &cit v. Stale. 3% S6.2d 645. 665 (AI •. 1980). COnsequently . ...-.: look forward to the ...... ntual demise of the notion that bl~ks possess an inherent bias ;n fa"" r of defendants."

out-of-court . tatement to rebut Stat.'. proof of flight /hum v. Stale. 27 ABR 76 (October 16. 1992). Bunn was convicted of I"O/Inslaughter in the shooting death of Jack McDaniel. At trial. the State pre· sented evidence that, after the shooting. Bunn ned Alabal"O/l. In response to this evidence and in order to explain hi. flight, Bunn attempted to solicit from Ru .. ell Johnson. his roommate at the time of the shooting, testimony that Johnson had told Bunn that McDaniel's family had threat.nM Bunn', lif•. The trial court sustained objection by the

TilE AlABAMA LAWYER

State and refused to allow the t.stimon~, hQlding that it was hearsay, By a thr..,-to-two margin, the cQUrt Qf crimi· nal appul. aff,rmed, agreeing that the statement was inadmiuible hearny. Judges Bawen and Taylor di~nted. The supreme court granted Bunn's petitiQn for certiorari tQ review that hQlding. Th. sup reme cou rt. in an unanimous Qpinion, reversed the judg· ment of the court Qf criminal appeals, hQlding that the testimQny was proper tQ explain Bunn's Hight, an issue raised by the State. "Heawy has been defined as an outQf.cQurt statement Qffered to prove the truth Qf the matter stated: Ex parle Brllars, 456 SQ.2d 1136, Il3S (Ala. 1984). JQhnson', statement that he tQld Bunn that McDaniel's family had threat· ened Bunn'. life was not Qffered tQ prove th at Mcllanitl's family h ad actu . lIy threatened lIunn'5 life, but, rather, tQ prove that Bunn left Alabama because he had be"" told that hi. life had bet n threatened. Staled differently, the statement was not offered tQ prow: its truth, but to pTOvt' lhe effecl il had on Buml. -If it is material tQ prow: that a perwn at a specified time had bun put On notice about a matter, Qr entertained a specific bel ief, acted in gQQd or bad faith, had a specified motive to do Qr not to do an act Or tQ do an act with a specified mQtive, Qr was mentally deranged, prool that a statement was made to him priQr tQ the time in QuestiQn which was reasQnab ly calculated tQ create, and which is Qffered fQr the purpQse of showing, notice, belief, good Qr b.d laith, motive or mental derangement is not viQlative of the heawy "-,Ie." Cha rles Gamble, McElrOIl 'S Alabama Evidmce, 1273.02 (4th Ed. 199 1).

Primer on ht.on'. t e chnic.' proce dure Hunlleg v. Siale, 26 ABR 5589 (&ptember 18, 1992), In Hunt/ell, the State petitiQned the ,upreme court fQr certiorari tQ review lhe judgment of the CQurt of criminal appeals which had reversed Huntley's convicti'ln in JoII..son CQunty lor rape and sodomy. The court of criminal appeals reversed the cQnviction because the State exercised it! per~mptQry challenges in a radally discriminatQry manner. The supreme

THE AlABAMA LI.wYF.R

tourt, in an opiniOll authQred by Justice Adams, affirmed. Bdore the Hunt/ell JUT)' was SW1)rn, the ddense moved to quash the jury panel on the ground that the State had exercised it. challenges in a racially dis· criminatQry manner, in violation of the defendant's cQnstitutional guarantee Qf a right to an impartial trial. s,.., Bolson v. K<mlllC/c!l, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). The recQrd reflects t hat afte r t he defense made its mQtiQn, Ihe auistant district ~tlomey stated: [By the proseculri~ [, I'm 3!Suming I'll be given an opportunity 10 put my reasons on tM record fQr [the) strikes. [By the CQurt). If I find it neceuary. Por the record, I'd like tQ say that . . Ihe State did use five of its st\Itn strikes to strike blacks. However, according tQ on;' records, [ther~ are) still five remaining blacks on this JUT)', ilthat toTTed? [By the defense). Yes, your HonQr . The probl.m is that [ ... think the C'lurt shQuld rule that if Qn~ .trike is n'lt a - [if) tM" i. not a ."ce-neutral reason fQr Qne of the strikes , ... the CQurt can turn around and Qrder the ..... hQI. venire ... [quashed) and a new Qne empaneled. In ruponse, the trial judge stated: "Por the record , the CQurt does not find ~id.nc. QI racial bias in the strikes, especially in light of the fact thai there are still five [blacks[ remaining ... but fQr th. purposes of the record, J will Itt the [prosecutrix[ give her reasQns in each case." 'The court Qf triminal appeals reversed the trial court and remanded the case, holding that the State had -fai led to ca.rT)' it! burden Qf articulaling _. . clear, spedfic and legitimate r.ason. fQr the challenges ..... hich related tQ the particular case tQ be tri.d and wh ich~ .. non· discriminatoT)'. " It is important to nQte that the grant of certiorari in this case was tQ consider the cQntention that beca use the trial court upressly d.t. rmined that the defendant had f.iltd 10 present a prima facie case of discriminatiQn, the CQUrt of appeals erroneQusly CQncluded that the burden had shifted to the State tQ justify its challenges , and, cQnsequently, erroneously held that the State had failed tQ ca.rry its burden. Justice Adams , in Ihis case , gives to Ihe Alabama practitioner an excellent

r.view Qf the technica l procedure inl'Oked by Balson as fQllows: Upon the uercise of the prosecutiQn's first peremptory chall.nge of a black veniremember, a (!efendant is entitled to a Balson hearing, Harrell v. Siale, 555 So.2d 263, 267--68 (Ala. 1989) (adopting a 'bright li ne test' for determining the defendant's right to a hearing): ... This hea ring prQvides the defendanl the OPpOrtunity t'l marshal all available evi· dence in Qrde r tQ construct a prima lade cas. Qf discriminatiQn. Ex porle Branch, 52 So.2d 609, 620 (Ala. 1987): Ex por le Jachon, 516 S'l.2d 768, 77Z (Ala. 1986) ... II the ci rcumstance. raise an inference of discrimination, the State must altempt tQ justify its chal· lenges, the burden having shifted to the State t Q rebut the defenda nt's pri ma facie case. Ex parte Bird, 594 So.2d 676, 681) (Ala. 1991), PQllowing the Slate's explan. ti'lns, the def~ndant may 'lifer rebuttal evidence 'shQ..... ing that the reasons or explanations are merely a sham or pretut' fQr racial discriminatiQn, Ex porle Branch, 526 So.2d at 624 .. . Justice Adams rea,oned th.t, "A lthough each IQgical step within this proceduralframewQrk is theoretically severable, c'lnSideratiQnl Qf just ice, upediency, a nd judic ia l economy oppose a slavish adherence to the frame· work in practice, Pirst, cQnsiderati'lns Qf judicial economy requi re a record of all the evidence buring Qn the issue of alleged discrimination, AlthQugh, technically, the State is under n'l compul_ siQn to rebut an inference Qf discriminatiQn until a prima facie <:ase exists, this Court, if it determines lhal an inference dearly exist!, will not hesitate tQ r.mand a cause to the trial court with directiQns tQ .xamine the State's explanations.In short, the supreme court refused tQ reverse the judgment Qf the cQurt Qf criminal appuls lor CQnside ring the entire record with which the trial court sought to expedite the judicial process. Justice Adams further Qb.eoved that, - ... considerations 01 ju,tice invite a conlemporaneous record, rather than post hoc e xcu~es 'lffer.d by the stat. IQng after the events have faded fr'lm the trial judge's memory.For example, a ddendant may both CQfl!ilrucl a primo f'ld~ case and rebul the State's prQffered expl anatiQns loy JanuaT'j'I993f 65

showirIJ tNt the prOJeCUtion e""rciKd III dtwltOl'Y voir diu. (21 "ldlilp.llrlte eumlMlion o f the membus of the vmi~"I3I·~rlle tUoJl!Twnt" of the venlrtmembtrs who ,hared ctrt ... in dwxttristiaothtrllw> rKI:. and (411 number of cmllengt' 10 blxk ftniumtmllfl'l diJproportioNlt 10 their up~ntlltion on the vtniu. S« £¥ pqrle 8rand1. 526 So.2d 01623·24,

ALABAMA SUPREME

COURT - CIVIL R.t.Uon back doctrine

c._t be uNCI to clrcwmrent Alii. Code 1 11-47-23 In Cit, of Birmingham D. CzrlD Dovis. ( Ms. 1911140. Novembtr 6 , 1992), _ _S0..24-(Ail. 1992), the court held thai the cIoctrine of ftiation hick cannot be uNd to uve I cbim that is otherwiN hirred by tilt noti« of claims sutute.AJ". C<xh 111-.47·23. On January 17. 1990. tht plaintiffs suf<! the deffndints for injuries ill.gOO· Iy suffered in a two-eIIr occident which occurred on September 30. 1989 with the Ci\)l of Birmingham. In ilddition to the M~d ddtndmts. tho compl.int ,1$0 liSled vlrious nctitiously n.armd dlfendanl$, includil\ll 0IIt" deKriMd III IOIIows: "Odendant No. 10. UW pr...on or entily who controlled CIT lNintained the r~"y Ind r~dwlY signs where the .ecident was eaUJtd to like place." On April 10, 1990 the plaintiffs amrndtd tMir complaint to substitute the City for "DefeTllianI No. 10". The City moved for a 5ummary judgment on grounds tNt the pbintiffs had not filed a notke of cl.im with tho City as t'flIuirtd undtr ffll-.47-Z3 and 1147· 192. The pllintiffs II'gued that the Ci\)l's JUb$titulion of I rwned. defendant for I rltlitiously named dlf.ndant properly sued ulltu hick to tIM: cbte the

complaint ...... oriiinally filed. 1M trill I;OUrt dtnitd the Cil)'"s moticn for sum· IN.ry judgment. The City was granted intulocutory appral nising the issue of whdher the b~r of the munidpal noti<:t .llatutt CIII be iVOKIed by .ubsti· tution under Rule 9(h), A.R.Civ.P .. and the relation b"k doct rine under Rule 15(e). A.R.Civ.P.

1/1

66 1Jllluary 1993

In revt"ina the tri~1 court'l or der dollying the City's motion for ""'""""f judament. tilt court dnw <In <In.llo(ly bello."ftn tilt munici~1 noli« of CWI!I$ .tatute and the problt. non ·clai ms $Ulute. Both ....e Jtltutu of non-<=Wm, as oppo&td to Jtltutn of limiutionJ.. In conslrulna the probllt non·claim IlJtute, the )aw il tllli the non·claim do.. 001 f.1I within the heJling provi· Jions of tilt ulation hick cIoctri .... MmItl/ u. 8ullle, 368 So.2d 20, 21 (Ala. 1979). This is Mcause nothing in thf original complaint can [)( J/lid to put the utate on noli« of the additional claim. So. too, Is the rule in the conltJIt of tIM: municipal not;u statute. The doctrim of ulation hick cannot be uJed to uw .. claim tlllt is otherwise barred by tmt 5Utute. In the irutan! cut. the plain. liffl' claims 'Nert barred because the City wu not ,iftn nolice within Sll mon~ of the KCTUilI of thoM claims. The JUb$titution. oullidt tilt siJ:-month notice perIod. of a munieipilit~ for i fictitiously Nmtd pari}l properly sued is not • sufficient prtUntatiOll of tilt claim to the municipality 10 avoid the bar of fll-.47.2J.

Fraud cl.lms _ when does stat"'. of limitations begin to

~"' In 1I0000rd U. MUluul Surting! Lift {nJu,,,nce ComPfJIlN. ( Ms. 1910698, Septemllfr •. 1992). _ ' " " - - " , " 1992), the court was prtWlted with tho i»uc. of when a pbintiff II dlargtd with knowltdge offnud by. defendant 50 as 10 besin the running of the datute of limitations. In December 1983. the pbintiffs hus· band WaJ dlagOOKd with ean«r and was hospiUliwJ three times [)(fou his death on J&ntW')l27, 19M. At tht time of her hUlband's duth. tilt pbinti/f ""U paying pumiums to tilt defemunt (or H\ltq] health insuW'112 pOliciH then in .{(tct for IItr Vod IItr huWnd. Approlimltely one week aftu her hUlband'S death. the plaintiff tarked with offICe" of the dtfencbnt btcio.ust w -did not f«llhtyhid paidwhtrt the insunnce m&n told us thit they would." At that lIme. the pla;ntiff h.d 1 firm conviction In her mind that the defendant WI. not plying III that it should pay under the pOl!tin. The plaintiff

belifved that theu weft claims under the pOliciu that Jhould ....... betn paid but wert not !>lid. When tIM: plaintiff asked the dtfencbnt 10 !>lY lhoit iJddi· tiONl c"illlS, the pllintiff ...... told ~t Ihf dtftndant had pooid III it ..... going

..".

In Augult 1990. the plaintiff sued. Illegil\llihit tht. ddeTlliant had fntudu· lenlly failed to ~y to Mr ~II amounll that were due undtr the insurance poli· cies.. The defendant I1"IOVed for l lumIN.· t1' Judgment. arguing that sinct the plaintiff had hid lctual knowledge of htr fr<lud claim just a few "'uks after her hll&Mncl'l dtilh in 1984. her claim wu hirnd by tIM: Ipplicablt ",'O-~Jr lIatute of limitatlonl. The plaintiff countered by arauil\ll ~t Iithough silt had betn dissatisfied "ith the paymml on Iht policiu. she hd nO utual knowledge of the defendlnt's IHeged mud until I lawyfr Ditrnined tht IN.t· ler for her ann I chlnce d'o.cu •• ion betwten her and tM L"lwytr's wife. The trial court grlnted the defendant's motion for summary judgmtnt, finding lhat as I matter of law. the plaintiff had actual notice of lilt alleged fraud more than lwo ~ars before tilt filing of hu suit. In I'tW"JI\II tilt trial court's grant of sum mary judgmen t, Chief Justice Hornsby. wrltina lOr the ~ril)'. staud that tht trial coort's lUmmlry judgment rattd on ill conclusion ~t Iht plain. lill's lWIIicions tNt tilt ddtnd&nt had not properly paid on IItr cliams rtq\Iired the findina that she IgI(w of tIM: allrgtd fnoud III I matter of law. The majority concluded, howe~r. thlt in this ClSe such a finding WIS erroneous. Though there wu evidence which certainly supported an Inftrence that in 1984 the plaintiff beliM:d she had been dtfnud· ed. ther...... al$O evidence supporting In inference lhll the pllintiff simply belei~ hor iru.uTl.Oct ...·'th the defendint Wl.l il\adtqWlte and silt chost to find more utlsfaclory insurlnce el..· wheu. Miff Citing the rult that the quation of whfn • plaintiff would hM: disc(Mrf<! f",>11 should be !lUn a,,'if from the jury and cln:idtd IS I IN.tltr of law only in whue the plaint ifff tKlwllJi ImtuJ of fKU that would put I relSOn,ble perlon on notice of fraud (s« lUcia u. Clobe Uk & Accident Ins. Co., 584 SG.2d 458 (All. 1991)}, the

"'U

THE AlABAMA LAWYER

majority conc1ud~d .. foll OW$: Reasonable people could disaSree On whether HDWard could justifiably rely on the repr ..entatiolUl by Mutual Sav. inss. In IiSht of the compl .. ity and inter·relation of the policies and the fael that she was speaking to the manager at the company office, H"""aro could ha\'e concluded that she had received all that she was entitled to undor the policy terms. The evidence would support tm inference that 1m learned of facts ShDW' ing the po1iSibility 01 fraud only afler an anorne)' scrutinized the polici.s; i( tm factfinder accepts that inference. then the record indicates that she filed her claim with IW<l yeaTS from the date she learned of tho~ facts. Th. question wheth.r .he. justifiably relied on the insurer's representatiolUl as to t he policy coverage cannot be resol .... d .. a matter 01 law. Under these facu and the law as it h.s developed since flic/rox u. Stooer, [551 So.2d 259 (1989)[. that is • jury question. In ... parate opinions, Jwticu Maddox<. tlouston and Stegall dissented. Jwtices Houston and Stegan concluded that as of February 1984, when the plaintiff admilledly .IIDWed hu insurance poli. des 10 bp ... "becau... [Mutual ~ings[ didn't do what [Mutual Savings] WaS suppoo.o:d to do", .he had actuallmowledge of the facts thai would put a rea· sonable person on notice of fraud. Accordingly, the statutory period of limitatiolUl began to run at that time. and it upired in 1986. Justice Houston also opined as foil"",..: "The majority of the Court has now allowed the new justifiable reliance standard-the subjective standard-in fraud cases to ·tread into the arena' of the discovery rule for the purpose of determining when th~ statuto,), period of lim iL:ltions began to run." [Citation omitted ]. This is contrary to Chief Justice Hornsby's spedal concurrence in Southern Sioies Ford. I"c. u. Proctor, 541 So.2d 1081. 1090·92 (Ala. 1989): '[SJt~tutes of limitations. even when !wed on the 'discovl:ry rule' in the fraud conte~t, should be measured by objet· th-e standards." 5U So.2d at 1091. An award of compensatory or nominal damages is not a pre· requisite to an a..... ~rd of punitiw dama,ges. In Shoals Ford. Inc. v. McKinney, [Ms. 1902012. August 7. 1992[, THE ALABAMA u\WYER

_So.2d_ (Ala. 1992), the plaintiffs purchased. pickup truck from the defendant The defendan!"s salts representative represented to the plaintiffs that tm truck ..... as "new". No discussion took place as to ..... heth.r an~ body work Or repa irs had been don. on the trock. A few weeks bter. the plaintiffs discO\'ered that the paint on the truck was chipping and that there wert dents in the hood. Th e plaintiffs late r learned that the truck had been damaged b}' hail and had been subsequently repaired and repaint· ed. The plaintiffs sued the ddendant and asserted claims for wanton.,.. and fraud in connection with the sale of the truck. The plaintiffs only sought to ,"cowr punitiw: dama,ges. FollOWing trial. judgment was entered in favor of the plain· tiff. on a ju')' verdict awarding them $50.000 in puniti,.. dama,g... On appeal. the defendant argued. inler olio, that the trial court err.d in failing to wt aside the ju')' wrdict on sround5 that the jury failed to award the plain · tiffs either compensato ry or nominal dama,ges. In a per curiam opinion. the supreme court affi rmed the trial courf. judg· ment. The majority concluded tha i !wed upon the trilogy of O.K. Bonding Co. u. Millon. 579 So.2d 602 IAla. 1991). FiT$1 Bonk of&:xu~. Fielder. 590 So.2d 893 (Ala. 199]). and C<Jlerpillar. Inc. v. lIighiou.·er. [Ms . 1901465. August 7. 1992]. _ _50.2d _ _ • an award of compensatory Or nominal dam.g •• is not a pre·requisite to an award of puni· tiw dama,ges. In O.K. ikmding. the court ••peaking through Justice Almon. he ld that an award of compensatory or nominal dam· ages was a pro -roquisit. to award 01 punitiw dama,ges. Seven month. later. however, in First Bonk of Boo:, the court. due to an appa,..,nt owrs!ght 01 O.K. &Jnding. held the other ,,·ay. The inconsistency in the holdings in the~ IW<l ~ w.. di>cussed in Ci1terpillar, where the court. speaking through Justice Adams. distinguished O,K. Bonding and Firsl lkmk oIBou:. In the instant cast, the majority ruled upon the reasoning of First &Jnk of 8oo.land C<Jler· pHiar to hold that a5 long as there is evidence to support findings b}' the ju')' that (I) the plaintiff was injured or dam· aged. at least nominally, by the dden· dant's actions. tmd the defendant's

actiOlUl juslifj> the imjlO5ition of punitiw damages (i. ... the ddendant acted with an intent to deceiv •. or rec klessly or wantonly). then an award of compen· sato,), or nominal dama,gu is not a pre· requisite to an award of punitive dama,ges.

Standard of liability for 1nn-

keepe". wrongful or unautttorlze d entry Into gue.t '. room In Thetford. ~I~. o. Cil!l ofC/an/on. [Ms. 1910567, September 18. 1992[. _ _So.2~(Ala, 1992), the court finally addressed the .tandard of liability for an inn kuper's wrongful or unauthoriud entry into a gues"s room. On or about June 10. 1989. Shirley Ann Banks was a business invitee of the Holiday Inn in Cbnton, Alitbama. On or about the same date , Eddie Gore, the manager and an emplO}'« of the Holiday Inn. accompanied Ms. Banks' husband to her room. where. in tho presen" of a representative of Ihe Clanton Police Department. Gore sawed through a locked door chain to gain ent')' to Banks' room. Mr. Banks lat.r took hi. wil. to another location. where he inflicted such 5e .... re injuries to her that she died as I proximate result of his be.atings. In April 1990. Mary Thetfo rd. Ms. Banks' sister and personal repr.... nta· tive. filed a wrongful de.th action against Gore, Holida;' Inn. Inc. and the City 01 Clanton. Her complaint was later amended to add Williams Motels. Inc. which operated the Holiday Inn in Clan· ton. All ddendants filed motions for summary judgment which the trial court granted. Thetford appealed. In re""Tling the trial court', summa')' judgment as to Co re and the hotel defendants, the sup..,m court. in a JWr curiam opinion. specifically addrused for the first time the standard of liability for an innkeeper's wrongful or unauthorized entry into a gun!"s room. Though tho cou rt did not expressly adopt any specific standard. it noted that the gen· eral rule appears to be as foil"",..: After a suut has been a.,igned to I room at an inn Or hotel for his exdwi,'e u~. he has a right of occupation for all lawful pU1"JlO5';'S until it i5 vacated. subjed only to tm right of the innkeeper or his servants to enter the rOOm at rta· sonable timu and in a pro~r manner,

Januaryl993! 67

and fnr such purposes as might ~ nec· ~ssary in the general management nf a hntel. nr upOn the happening nf snme unanticipated cnntingency .... An innkeeper is Ii,tble if he nr his ~r· vant unjustifiably Or unreasonably inter· feres with his guest's right tn pri~acy and the peaceful enjoyment of his room. Stated anotl-..,r way. the innkuper has "an affirmative duty. stemming frnm a guest's right nf privacy and peaceful pos. ~~inn. nnt tn allow unregistered and unauthnrized t hi rd pa rt i~s tn gain access tn the rooms nf il.l guesl.l: Alier citing and discussing cases from nthu juriWictinns which have discu~ innkeeper's liability. the majnrity of tl-.., court concluded that questions nf mate· rial fact existed iIS tn m whftl-..,r Go ... ·s actinns nf cut t ing the chain nn M•. Banks' door and allowing her husband tn enter her room were justified and/nr rusnnable undu the circumstances; and (2) if the actions ,,~ ... not justified and/nr reasnnable under the ci rucm· stances. whethe r Mr. Banks' criminal conduct Wils fnreseeable when Gore cut the chain. Viewing all nf the evidence in a light mnst favnrable tn the plaintiff. the majnrity cited evidence demonstrat· ing that upOn chocking intn the hotel. Ms. Banks not ified the cle rk that she had been buten by her husband and was hiding frnm him fnr fear of addi· tional abuse. The majnrity cnnduded that this e'Jidence presented an i~ue nf fact about whether Gnre and HOlliday Inn knew that Ms. Banks WiIs an abused wife whn was hiding in fear frnm her

husband. Accnrdingly. a jury questinn was pre..,nted as tn whether the hntel manager cnuld fnres« anGther beating by Ms. Banks' husband. The majority affirmed the trial court's summa ry judgment as tG the City Gf ClantDn, The plaintiff argued that the failure Df the City's pnlice office .. tn comply with the mandates of Ala. Code §15·10·3 (1975) ("whenever a law enfnrcement Gfficer in,-esligates an aile· gation of family vinlence. whether nr oot an arrest i, made. the officer shall make a written repOrt of II-.., alleged incident, ..:) constituted "statutGry negligenc~: and. th.refn .... summary judgment as tn the City waS inapprnpriate. After dis· cus.sing the ~ltmenl.l neceJ,Sary to rKOV' er under the thenry of statutory negligence. the majority npined that though the stalute (wh ich had only been in effect fnr three weeks ~fnre tl-.., inci· dent involved in this case) requires the nfficer tn file a repOrt. it does nnt say where and does oot say what should be done with the repOrt. The majnrity found that under th"'" circumstances. a jury could not conclude thot the officer's fail· ure tn file a report requir ed by the statut~ proximately caused tl-.., death nf Ms. Banks. Abat.m.nt of cl.lm_an personal injury action be .m.nded by pe •• onal rep •• • ....t.tlv. aft •• plaintiff di •• •• ...ult of pe •• on.llnjury, .v.n though mo •• th.n two

BAR DIRECTORIES 1992-93 EDITION AJabama State Bar Members: $25.00 each Non-Members: $40.00 each Send check or money order to

Alabama State Bar Directory, P. O. Box 4156 Montgomery, Alabama 36101 68 1January 1993

y •••• hav. e xpired afta.

de.n, of plaintiff? In 10"9 Inslilul~.

4. 19921.

NaUG"a[ Spa a"d Pool

Inc. 1M.!. 1910620. September

_S0.2"-

(Ala. 1992) and Hogland v. The CefDlex Corporation, (Ms. 1910077. Sept~mb .. 4.19921. __ Sn.2d__ (Ala. 1992). the Cnurt nverruled Elom u. Illinois Cc!lro/ Golf RR.. 496 So.2d 740 (Ala. 1986). and held that personal injury actions 00 not abate wh.n a plaintiff dies as a result nf the alle~d wrongful act of the defendaot. After tracing the histGry of Elam and Alabama's wrnngful death statute. codi· fied at A/a. Code §6·5-410 (1975). the majnrity. in an opinion written by Chief Justice Hnmsby. held that the sUNival sta t ute. Ala. CDde 16·5·462 (1975), means exactly what its plain language states. that "0/1 personal claim. UpOn which an action has been filed ... sur· vive in favor of and against persGnal ... presentatives , ..• (Emphasis supplied). The fact that the injury that leT\'eS as the basi. fGr the personal injury action later give. ri.., to a wrDngful death claim does nnt extinguish the nri gina l persGoal injury claim. The majority also overruled the hnldings in Mallison u. Kirk. 497 So.2d 120 (Ala. 1986J. Padw u. Fies & Sons. 243 Ala. 348. 10 So.2d 13 (l942). and Cllrroll v. Flora/a Memoria/ Hospi· /al, Inc" 288 Ala. 118.257 So.2d 837 (1972). tG the extent that they r~lied upon the rule that a personal injury actinn does nnt survive the plaintiffs death if a wrongful death claim could be based on the same injury. The rule that a plaintiff substituted fnr a deceased plain· tiff mll5t file an enti ... ly new complaint in nrder tn recover fnr wrongful death is nn IGnger the law, ShGuld the plaintiff die as a lUult of the injuries alleged in the nriginal persnnal injury suit. the properly substituted persGnal rep ... sen· tati,'e may amend the nriginal complaint tG add a wrongful death claim. H.nce· fDrth. the nriginal persGnal injury action SUT\;VI'S the dealh of th~ plaintiff just as if the injury had not caused the death. Mnr.over. and perhal" just as impor· tantly. the majority held that in addition to recovering puniti~e damages on the wrongful death claim. the persGnal repr"",ntative in such cases may also now recnwr compensatnry damagn nn the persGnal injury ci;,ims. _ THE ALABAMA UlWYER

• M·E·M·O·R·(·A·L·S • FRANK B. PARSONS On the thi rd of August 1992. Frank B. Parson. died.

da~

Fr an k rarsons will be truly mined by hi. f~mily. brother. in Iht law and th. citizens of both Fairfield and the state of Alabama. Frank Parsons WlS born and raiud in Fairfield. Alabama. H. g.lIdullled from rai'field High School in 1936. Aftn allending Birm;Ilgham Southern Colleg. for \'0<0'(1 lind /I half )'eIIrs. he "~nl \0 the Uniwrs,ly 01 Alaba".., School 01 Ln.' and graduated in JanuaJ» 1942. II .....aslll the University \lUI Frank mel and married th. former Elizabeth

Reanu. Once home, hank began the

I'r;octi« 0113"'. 11. wvtd as the city anClfmy for both tilt cities of Fairfield and llut)1own. UlVing fairfield O;OlltmuQU.ly fo r 4(1 years. He also stJVW twice as president oIlhe 6elSemer nat Association, president of th. ~·.i , fi.ld Chambf,r of Com. mereo, pruiden \ of the Fai rfield Exchange Club and president nf the Birmingham Northwest Camp 01 GideOll$. Inlernational. In addition. he lOrvtd on the bo.ord nf tnutus nf Lloyd Noland Itospital in Fairfield 101' the put eight ~a,.,. Fn.nk ...'M i mtmber 0( the Alabama St~t~ Bar. the Birmingham Bar Association. the Arntric.on Bar A>.sociation. the Alabama Trial ~,., A>.sociation. and the Arntflc.on Judicature Society. Ju.t th r •• wub bdore hi. death. Fn.nk was honored b)' mem be,., 01 the sllIte bar for 50 yea,., of lO1Vk. as an attorney. Th. church was an important part

of Frank'. lif•. He joined Fairfield UnitN M.thodi.t Chur(h when he was IZ. At tilt age of 17. M began to tuch Sun<.boy School and conlin~ to do so unlil hi. dUlh. H. al.., had .erved on the board of truslt •• of the church sine. ]950. Frank Parsons contributed 10 his profe$Sion . the State of Alabama. his family and his church. H. was a man of comp.:wion and honor. and was revered and admired by all tOO" .... ho l!neI.' him. t:liubuh rarson. died July 5. 1974; Prank JlfW:r "marritd. H. is surviwd b)' a dlIughltr. Mrs. Iktty Frank Mcln.....lI; two sons. Donald and Bruce l'ar5l)ns; th ru .illeu. Mrs. Margutrite Maveety. Mrs.. Sadie Slaugh ter and ~' n. ~'reda Wood· man; and two brothen. Joo: and Carl

Parsons. - J. Clt"';1 Tnmb "i!;rflt ld. AlllbtllllQ

• M·E·M·O·R·(·A·L·S • WIILtA.' ! I l r.sllY Bt.1ITOS

"""''''"''

Mmllltd: 1m

DWd:0<I0I><r27. t'192 JOIIS CflASOS /Ia~ Mh",lIe

IIdmillM: 1928 DiM: Stpttml)o r 26. 1992

S.'.l.tUn SKtS.~~R HP.lDE, JR. 1",101';"

MmiIlM: 1940 Ditd: Stptfmbor 4. 1992 I!:ICIIARD CLoIYfOS Hu»'''

'M_

Mmilll'd: 1939 £);."f:Aprit 19.1992

CfIARL£S ROBERT RlCIlARDS Mmmtd: 1978 Ditd:~'nWr 6. 1992 JORDA.~ WALKER

Oitd:O<Iober 12.1992

McAfEE. J~. Cull""", MmillM: 19J7 Dkd: Oclobe, 22. 1992

Br.HNAltO FAAHtOR SYKES

C EOItGE AulER"T ~' tTCttf.t..L HirminSlham Mmillftl: t9-lS

H oUIOU) O·I)P.t..L W~P.K.'l

DWd: Auau>lZ8. t992

Ditd: A"Ilust 22. 199'2

1)o.'WJ)

L. NE\\'SO!oI

Bimlinghtmt NJrnillftl. t9S2 fMd: Moy 12. 1992

CIWILES I'ou.AIw JACKSOS. JR. MO""lam Brook

VIRGtL L.t:E f'urItEy. JR.

Mmlllod: \941

Mmillod: I~ Oitd:Oclol><r 13. 1992

o.o.:<I:Oclol><r3.1992

~Wk

Mnullftl: 1969

/'1rxrISlfJ''''''1I

Mmill<'ll: 1942 1)kJ: NOvtmbt' 1. 1992

"",...,

Mmitlftl: 1932 WUli....'! BROCE Wllm: &mUnqhtmr Mmllltd: 19-10 Ditd:~"""'r24.

t99'2

January 1993 / 69

• M·E·M·O·R·I·A·L·S • CHARLt:S

POELL~ITZ, IV ~' r.

Heflin .."1 •.

President. t rise today to pay trib-

ute to Chnles Augustus Potllnitz. IV. who

•

passed away recontly. He wa.<

a prominent member of the legal community in ~. and a d~ ptrsonal friend of mi"", Charln "'U a nati,~ of Creens00..." Abba .... whe .. ht "''lIS born in 1908 to Or. CIu..1es A. IWllnilz, III lind Annie Roulhac Poel1nit •. Ht graduated from the AIab.1rn/II'''htary Institute in Anni.ton in 1926 and then enrolled at tile UnMrsity of the South. locattd in Sfwanee. Ten. ne!!te. fie .ubseQuently attended the law school at th. University of Alabama. While II student. Cha rlu

was involotJ in all facets Q[ campus tife. lie rtcfi\~d many awards and honors for his ltadmhip, was prestdrill of his "'as

~nior

d;:w at Se\o.'an«.

actiw in honor societies and was

a,"d ootdoorsman. After ~ Khool. Charles 1I"OO'o'td to Flortnce. Alabama ",h... h. began pueticing law wilh George Bliss J~s in the firm of Jones & 1'01:11nitz. Mr. Jont! left the firm 10 b«<Ime oxeculh .. ~cr~tary to Gov. Chauncey Sparks. Laler. Charles join.~ with Will ~ti tchell. one of Alabama·, mo.t distinguished la~rs. 10 form the finn of Mitchell & I'oellnil,.. The firm grew 10 b. one of Ih. SI>.I,·, most re,""",ned law firms. AI lhe Ii",.. 01 his dath. il WU i<n.oIo"n by Iht name of Poellnitz. CO% & .loots.. In ~'I'on 10 W.H. Mitchell. Chules Iud some great laW)~rs as partnou O\.. r the )·urs. indu~ing Bill ~litchtll. who left the firm to become presidenl of Ih. fi .. t Natlol\il Bank of Florence. Ceorge McBurne)'. Bob Cox. Sam Robinson. Rob Jones. Cary Wilkin .on. and iUl

Br.\nl Young. Itls brother. Riclurd Poollnitz. i. ~ truly oul.landing la~r in Cr«nshoro. Alab.ama. He practiced law for more than 50 years bokl .. retiring st\.. ral )..ars ago. During World War II. Charles enl.red the Army as a pr i~ale. but wa.s laler assigned 10 the Jud~ Adl.vCIIle Corps. rectiving his commission from Ihe Judge Advocate School Ihe Uni,ersily of ~Ii chigan. Altor complt"!ing seYtrai ;wignmenu a.s a first lieulel\llnt. he ~I"\.. d ",ith the Sih Ai, ~·orct in tht Medilerranean thutu. ,,·here he was statiooed in North Africa alld Italy for QYtr two yeus. 11. was dilClurgtd in 1945. Iu",ng altaioollhe rank oIll"1ijor. During his lifetime. Chuln tamed many civic honors and wu a fI~lure in local communi~ projects.. lie served as director of the First NatIonal Bank of Florence for 40 years. and was a director of .."... ral other corporal ions. He was also a real esbte devtloper. He remain"ll a memMr 01 Trini~ Episcopal Church from the lime Ilt stilled in F10rence in t933 until hi. duth. Jfrving a.s Stnior ".... rdtn and on tht vestry. Cludes ,,-as a.n enthusiastic golfer and hunter. but his first 10\.. Wat always the Itg./II profession. H~ 1"""'hced in bolh the 01>.1. and fednal courts. and waS a member of Ih. Alab<lma Judicial Inquiry Commis· .ion. and w;u honored by hi' ",I<el ion al a fellow of the Ame rican College of Trilll ta~rs and Arneri· c.tn Bar f()tlndation. Charles Poellnitz. IV was highly "lI"'cl~ by hi'll«rs and the judges before "tJOm he aweared. H....... a lawyu·s la~r. Many }"QUng alloroeys sought his coulml ~1Id ~-;U. He oh."aYS {wild lime to help )'OUng la~ ... and Wat ~ rol. mode! for Ihem to emulate. He ,..as a gnat IUPJlO'ter of legal eduClltion and of impr(lYing the legal profession. llis was a lifelong commitment to th. profwion and to tilt community in which he made hil home. II. pos-

sesstd a ""arm and ingr.lt~ting per· ........ hty. lie ...... a killd mall. He Will be sorely miss.td by his family and thoK of us klt1unale eoough to haw known and worked WIth him owr lilt decades. - COIIgrtU/onrl/ Rtrord. Srplrmbn 17. 1992

VIRCtL LEE PELFREY Vi'll;II.« Pelfrey of Clio. AIabaInlo died on Octobu 13. 1992 at his residence Mllowing a brief illness. The bench a.nd bar of Barbour and Pike Counlies mourn the loss; of th~ outstanding attorney. citizen. family man and fnelld. Lu gr.ldU3ted from the Unil.-ersity of Alabama School of Law in 1980. He returned to his nali,-e Barbour County where he pr.lClictd law for a dozen )'tars mostly in Pike and Bar. bour Counti". During his brief but bright l~g.1 career Ln developed a , eputation al1lOnil tho bench and bar "" a t..... cious litigator. lie wu a zealou. """'xale and worthy ~r5ary. Hi. p,lIinstaking Ihroughnn. an~ animated personality helped him to devtlop a r.ercely 10),,1 and ~miring dimlele. Lte was a loving huoband and father woo undeniably placed only the low of his iamlly alxro.-e his !oI... of Ih. law. He Wa5 a member of a remarkable family and i. survived by his )<wely wife. There5a. and their precious daughter. Anne. a.s well as hi. parenls. Vi'llii and Grace Pelfrey. and his brothers. Or. Willillm V. Pel· frey. Dr. Robtrt J. Pelfrey and Jackson L. Pelfrey. Lee WllJ a good. hones\. hard· ....orklng lawyer. 3 de,·oled family mall .1Id a Irusted friend. H~ pass. ing leaves a >'(lid thai M fell not only by his family alld f.wllds but by his communlly and his colleagues.

",11

- Joft Ln WilliQ".. Tro,. A/QbomQ

THE ALARAMA LAWYER

• M·E·M·O·R·I·A·L·S • JAMES E. HART, JR. RESOLHD. Illal the memo bers of the E=mbia County Bar AUQCiation

hme. E.

lI~rt.

adopt this Resolulion in tribute to the memory 0( Jr .. and in recogn;.

1i(KI of hi •• ubstanhal contributions

\0 OUr profession, as ~II as to Our community and 5\;11 •. Jim was born on ~larch 2(;, 19.12.

and graduated from Marion MIlitary Institute in 1962. While th.r •. h. was a member nf the Monogram Club. Morgan's Raiders. lI ono. C()Uncil inod pla)~ ''''r$,ly foolboolL H. rKe;,'ed. Ibchtlor. in BwiMM Administration from Auburn Uni·

versity am! graduated from CllmN" land School uf Law at Samford Uni'.... it)' in 1970 wilh a [)odor 01 JurisprulKlKt. cum laud •. While at Samford. h. was /I rntrnMf of the Cordell !/ulllnlernatiOl"\llt Law Soci. ety, Phi Alpha [)tIt. Law Fhternity and Alpha Tau Omega Fraternity. li e

wu the managing editor of \h. Cumberl;ond·S,omford Law R~"itw for 1969-70. Jim "'U admlmd to the pr<let ic~ 01 law in AI~bama in 1970. and in Florida in 1972. He was a member of the Alabama Statt Bar. The florida R>r, the Amtrican Har Auociatlon, tilt Amtritan Trial Ln.)..,r·, Auocia· t ion, th~ Alabama Trial Lawyer 's Association and the CTlminal De[en$e I.awye r·$ A..odation. Jle s.erved as Chairman of tilt Oil. Gas and Mineral taw Section and Ihe u..1'"'1'S Public Rel.lotioos CommillH or lhe Alibama Sl.lote Bar. He was a pa, t pruident of Ih. E.cambia County Har Association and Wal. at the Iirnt of hit dtath . .<eNing as Bar Commi .. iorwr for the 2hl Judicial Circuit. Jim was j .IIIlIlul, aggtU$lvt Irial and ap""lIate laW)'., who not only

nl[ AUMMA LAWYER

recoglliud. but beli.,...,d in. the con· cepllhat IIv pIXI;';e of law is a pmf... ion. 001 simply busiTIUS. He ...'U a "'um and true gentleman to his collugues at the Bar ~nd .Iway. adhered to the hight't .thical and intellretual standards. Jim's inletuts ...·..e many and ,·uied. II. was very <letive in other orgamtlllloru. lie was a member of tilt Escambia Count)' and the State of Alabama Caulemen's Associa· tions. s.eNing in variolls capacitie•• tht Alabama IncludIng President Cattltmtn's Association. At the Ii"", of hi. death. he was Pmidtnt of the South •• stern Livestoc k .:.po.ition. He was a ,'!:ry acti\'!: member of the Bre...1on Rotary Club. haVIng s.e"..,d in s.t\..,TJJ cap.dlit5. as "1:11 as Prui. dent and had betn honored by bring ""rmd a l>3ul Harris Fellow. He ...'U a pall president of the T.R. Miller Quarterback Club, UNtO as Chair. man of the .:.cambia County Drmocratic Executi"e CommIttee. as a membn of Ihe M.rion Milit.ry Institute Pruidential Advisory Council. a membn of the Advisory Bo.ard of Cumbrrlarnl School 01 Law and a member of the Cen t~nni.l Commilltt for the City of B.....100. JIm "'IS an ad;"'!: member of f irst United Methodist Church of Bre .... • ton, having served u a Lay Leader. Chairmen of tht Administrali"e Bo.ard. lind on other committeu and boards of the church. II. was a past member or the Conf.renee or Boud of T,uueu of the Alabama·W.st FloTida Conference of the United Methodist Church. he was also acti\1:l~ inV<llvtd in the Gulf Coast Council of the Boy Stouts of Amen· ell and many other civic organiza· lioru. lie .1110 served iLl Chairman of the AII·America City Award Commit· tet for the City 01 Ilr ewton. In recogni t ion of hi. many contribu· tions to hi. community, Jim ...... ulecled as Bre...10n'J 1990 Ciliun

ofthe\·eu.

forceful leader. a .... iu counselor. a kindly man and a dr .. friend. lIis was a sterling character. His gen · uineness was reflected in his gentle· manly demeanor. hi s .. nu of duly to his profu.ion lnd to the public, his unselfishnu•. his kindne ... his understanding and his woolrsorm I/OOd fella.... h,p. It "''U hi. privilegt to make for himself a (o"u""te life and to be given the s;l ti,/aclion of krlOWing thatth. ampl. fruits of hi' labors were 10 remain for the enrich"",nl or hit community, The memb ... of the [ !Cambia County Bar Association wi.h to up"" their grul appreciation 01 tlles.e qualitiu and this "Nice and 10 adopt this Resolution as a testi· mony to the memory of one we could ill afford to Iosr. Q ",HI;'., of Iht C""n/f Bor AssoclQlion held in 8,.",'on. Ald.", •• on A..,wll3. J992.

AikJpltd QI

B.~~mb/o

PLEASE HELP US ... The Alahama State Rar and L"wyer mag'line have no way of know ing when """ of our memben; is deceased unless we are noli· Oed, Do not walt 101 oomeone el~ 10 do il _ il you know of the death of one of OUr mem· bers. ~ lei us know. III"b~md

Send the information to: AliI;e 10 Hendrix P.O. Box 671 Montgomery, Alabama 36101

In Jim Iii"'. death ...... ha''!: lost a

J",,1lIl'Y 1993 / 71

CLASSIFIED NOTICES RATES: "'rnlMrs: 2 IrM listings per bar member p&r e.lendar yea. EXCEPT for ' pos~k>n wanted ' or 'position oNered" listings - $3S per insertion 01 50 words 01 ~,$.50 per add itional word. Nonm.mbers: $35 pe r Insertion of 50 words or less, $.50 per aQd't.ona1 word. Classilled COPY and pBymef11 must be receIVed according to the folio-Mng publishing schedule; "'.n....ry '13 I..ue--deadline Novembef 30, 1992: March '83 1. ._ - deadll!18 Jariuary 29, 1993; no deadlne extensoon& will be mElOe.

Send classmed copy end payment. payable 10 The Mla'phy. P.O. Box 4156. Montgomery. Alabama 36101 FOR SALE

" ' - - ' &press accepIed. • ,'" . . . ., Model AI-. 0/ 1'1,*,,-. al Conduc1. Personal eopon avaoIaDle

101 $5 (~s postage), ~ check 10 P.O, Box 671, Montgomety. Mobil· P'I'III 38101 Pre-pa,."."r~,

• for S.I.: Save 50 petcent on JIOUI ~u.

Lltwye... to; AI8tWna tawy6f' Classi/i&ds, eJo Mafgaret

month' Federal Repons. 1010 Var· Ava .. tom • • 4()6.AB, Washingtoo. D,C. 20005, PtlOnl (202) 393 ·331 1 VISA and Masl8tCatd accapled.

mont

• 'or S.I,: The Lawbook ""change. Lid b'Jys and ...ns III major 1ewIx:IoQ. lIate and ledefal. n81001'1W1de For all you. ItIwbook n..ed •. ~ ' ·800· '22 ·6686 Maste,C •• d , VISA and

lawbOok.

Call

National

• Pultlon Off ••• d , The

L~I

SIr·

vrces Corporltron 01 AlI~ IS seek· no! ~ lor .-..grog anorney of the Montgc:wMfy Reg""",1 Ofhce I.Jnder .... ~ 01 the executive dirlClOt. the ~ ,tIOfney shall

have g...,...al IIIPQnsibilily for man· l ij«I'IIfl1 o! the regional, sal"n~e and parHiMfl oll iC8I In the Mont(lOMflry legion and wperviaion of attorneys. Pllfaiegall and IIIPPDf\ Jta'!

Law

""*'<::a'i IargMIlawtlook

dMIIt. I't.oge inYenIco"oes. Low pnceI.

AppIc:erU ......1 "-"" hee year,' IiligaIlOn e.... ienc;e _ _ 10

Ia,.. rn AIIbIma

beall..", Quality. Your ... It.tactlon

p<actrc:.

abSOlutely gU8rantlid Alia. call Amorica'. large" lawbook dell.r )'OU warn to sell 'IO'JI ~

apply irrrnIedia~ lor IKII'\'\ISSIOn. 1.1 .... m.m 518f!lng Mlary II $29.369.

""'*' boOI<" Call for)'OUr free , Q\IOIH.

~tjgn

1-llOO-2J'9.1199. r..tWl L.IIw

-..~.

• r ......., WiIlam S. " " & Co .. 1nI;.. ...,.;,o.g

1IW legal COIM'IUI'II!y lor _

60 \'Nfl We buy. MIl. applelH ell Send wanllGtl 10' fw; (TI6)

IItwI;Io;I(Q

883-8100 Ill" pIlorw (I.ac:o.e28-7571)

POSITIONS OFFERED

WIlling 10

Please wbrnit application to M",c... ria Ludgood, E>:acW.", Ooractor.l.SCA

Cantral OUicl. 207 MOnlgomary S1rMI. 500 Bell BII~. MontIiJOf'*Y. ..... abel'l'lll 3611)( PostIlOn open unt~ Iilled. LSCA II an ~I opporWnl1y

• Poaltlon Off ••• d , lex attorney Major Alabama law linn IS seeking an attor .... y with an LL.M and/or IWO to fOOf yea,,' e...,...*- ., ..... law for a

pracuoo " its Mont· gomery olhce COnlidential r"ply to P.D 8o>C 1996. &mrnghBrn. AIabIIn'rI 3S201·19116. AIIenIioo; Hn"Ig AtIorney general CQfW",t,

• Po.lUon Olf ••• d , A!!ornay job_ NallOf'1al ."d Federel Employment R.porl Hlghty regarded I'I'IOnthly der.,1ed Il$lIng 01 attlll"nay .nd Ia,..· fIJIIr!ed jobs ~ the U.s. ~ other publlc/pflvata e mploye .. In WBsllingtoo. D.C .• 1hroughout the U,S, and abroad, 500--600 new lObi tach " - $.34 for ttYee 1TlOI'IthlI, for '"

sse

72 1Jmuary 1993

Ill"

SERVICES • Servlc.' AnentlOM attorneys and pur. ~ di rll<:torl, The Nat..".,1 Academy lor Paralfgal StIIdies has qua,fir,rd

perMoa" in 'IO'JI1ocaI arN rNdy lor ampjOyrnen1 in law otnc.l and QOfporatOOs. Our pa,alagal g,ad..al81 ara ~ained in areas of law such .. tamlly. re.1 e'lale, torl$. ~r,,"lnal, PfOOal" tnd ""'l'Dfalit law Student _ Me ello aveilaOle Thera Ir, no ' - lor theM _ For addrllDl"llll dotmII· lIOn. call Lisa p;p.alO " 1-81»922· 0771.1'><1. 3041

• S ••.,lce, TraffIC angln,er. ~on.ul· .. n"'e xpert wltneS$ Graduate. regis. tarld, prolessio~al anginaar Forl y \'N'" a . penence. Highway and cIty roadwly zoning Wille 0' cIIl lor r"""",. ' -. .Iack W ~. ~21 Belelull 0.;..". MOr'ngornary. AlIbi!·

..... 36109. Phone (205) 272·2353

• Sen<Ic., legal r..s..,,;h help

Elrpe-

rrenced attomey. """Iber o! AlaDamII Slate Bar &mea 1977 Access 10 ,tate

Ilw libra ry. WESTLAW a",I IIble Prompt daadline searchn Kalhryn Farnell. I I 2 MoOr. Buildng,

5,,,,,

Montgomery. Alabama MIl)( Phone (205) 271·7937 No ..".._110<1 is ~ /haI/he QUMry dille ~ _. ...aw "" be 1*10011*1 ill ~ Jhan /he QUPIy oIleg41_ perlonrwd

,,--

• S.rvlc.: £>cam"",I"'" of q ..... tioned doc""",nls, Handwlltrng, typewrIting and relaled exa<rW'l8lJOn1. In\effialiOn'Ily ~OIJrl·qualihed expert ""lnt1n OrpIDmote. American 80erd of ForenIIC Ooc:umenl £>ceml""'" Mllmber Amaric:en 5ocoe!y o! o.-ooned Documenl Exemlner •. the Intern'lron,l Alloo; lallon lor fdanlllic",on. the Srib1h Foransoc Scrance Sor;>eIy. end Ihe NalOonal Associatron ot C"mlnal Oaf",,,.. Lewyer,;. Retiroo Chief Ooc:u. ,,*,1 Examoner , USA CI L.llbor'1Ofiai.

THE ALABAMA IJIWYER

Mayer GldlQn. 218 Me'rymc>nt O"v •. Augulta G.o,gla 30907 Phone (106) 86()..q6T

Ha ....

• S . .... lc.' (:e,M..., Forensoc Docum.n, hamlne. Ct"el documllnt .... mm., Alabama Departmenl 0 1

For .. _ SoIrrcas. 'e\lI"act 8.5. r..t S. Gflduate ........... 51ry·ba""" ,esldent Ichool In document ... min aHon PubIrshed rratronallV and ",te<nalalalI ~. Eighteen ~"" ' tr iat e xpeflence siale/llde," COu tl S 01 Alab~ma Fo.g,,~. a lleration, and doc ument .ulhentlClt~ ua ml n"rons Crimina l Ind non-c' .......1 matle's AmerIcan Academ~ 01 FeUlnl;C SCllnee •. A..... 'lCan Boa,d 01 ForensIC DocuITW'II Eqmrr "' . . ............

SocrMy fA

Ouulroned Documenl E' lmllle ,s lamIr, r..t .... , 3325 lorna Road. ' 2· 316. PO eo. 3Ei0999. Brrmrngtwn. Alabama 35236-0999 PlIo .... (205)

,,,.,,"

• S. ",lce: Medlcil E>:pen testmony HeAl wrI .........11 your pOIentrai mOOrcaVclenlll ma lptactice cases lor mem and ClUM lo:rn gra tIS II your case has no mrtf~ or il CllUUtoo is poor, we win provrde a tree wrrtten ,eport. Stat affi.. "''''11 ... a".oIe PIeltse see d ispla y a d on pa~ 18 Hea llh CI, a Audllor •. Inc . 2 Corpo.ate Dro ve. Claa,wal" _ FIor.dl 3. 622 Phona (8 t3) 519-806<1 FAlC (813) 573-1333

Don't Risk A Valuation Penalty. Introduce Your Clients to Business Valuation Services. John H. D:wi~ 111. PhD. MAl. SRPA, ASA. preside,,! riBusincss Valumion &rvi, cs Inc., is rhconly dcsignMoo ASA Busi!\06 Valuation appra iser in AI~bama. BU!;incss Yalu.ltion Services pTOYides ooruulrnrion by !lie hour. 3pPrnisai ~ and c:<pctt totimon y in cases ci:

o Esmrc planning o EstatC $e{tlemcm o Mariml dislolul ions o Rcearital i.;:l{i0n5

o Emrlotff $llXk CM-ncMip

o Bankrupl'Y proceedingr; o Mcll>'Cl5 or acqUisll ions o Buy« 11 3pmcms o DissKkm srockhold..-.,. 5Uits

plans Con~' John H, Davis Ill . PhD. MAl. SRPA. ASA 4 Office Park Circle . Suite 305 • Birmingham, Alabama 35223 P.O. Bolt 530733 • Birmingham. Alabama 35253 (205) 8'10-1026

FOR RENT

• Fer "'. nt : OfI.ce spac. tor lea58 600 10 2.200 IqUl'. 1_, $8 95 per 1IQU8." I0OI Scutt'lsde mode<n oIIica. hllll p.r ~ ing Nicel y d ac P, ale d, draper .... ca.pet 21 53 14111 Avenue, S . Birmingham. Al a bama 35205 Phone (206}939-1327

1992-93 EDITION

Alabama Slale Bar Members: $25_00 each Non-Members: $40.00 each

MISCELLANEOUS

• Do ... U.n, The AlItMmra Hlstorrcal

Sfnd check or money order to

Ca" ,

1.<IIl _ trying 10 locate people 10 dONie 19it1 cantury or ""'IV 20th ~ ... troc:ri<tI 10 Clllplay in InIS&...... IPIOft In tt.. Capotol, Intereslact

PIIIIO." may conl.CI T."y Chilton. C/O Ala!>rlma H,.torrcal Ccmmrssron. Room 2 1. "'Ia bama Sti le Hou se . Montgomery, Alal)&ma 36130, Phone (205)242-3150

THE AIAJWolA LAWYER

Alabama Slate Bar Directory P.O. Box 4156 Montgomery. Alabama 36101

•

January 1993 / 73

Affordable. Dependable. Authoritative. West's' Coordinated Alabama Library !iii

Reporter for case k1W; Alabama Rilles Ii Civil P'roctdllft Annotated for drll'ient practice: and WESTtAWO for rol1lputer-assistcd IcgaI research.

MICHAEL O G()(II'lSM

Ask your 1\Iest itpiut,uti\'I:' about these ardOiM\\\':st P\tiitaOOns b )OOrpr.lCltt or call b IOOI't inform'lIlln

1-800-328-9352

West Publishing Ill' Am ways to win

'Of•• _ _ • UpO.lIIII!o$l2J..l101 .~

A"lho", I\r'Jon I.~ .... St atu B.o' r •• 671 ~'~"_

IDH1' L. M\'lS

AtIOmCyS throughout the stale rely on \\Iest publicillioos to help them meet thedJallmgts rilOlilys pI3Ctict.. \\tsl oIfns AIab;um prartitioom acoordinated !iblary with: ~s Alitb;una 0igI$ ard Alabiuna

III 161~1

........

_~ , I6(J)

l'IOO/ YHW

-~ """" 205/Jl"" 14