Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Jack B. Mills v. Kim Culbreth.

THOMPSON, Judge

AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.

See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(F), Ala.R.App.P.; Rule 54(d), Ala.R.Civ.P.;Buchanan v. Stanships, Inc., 485 U.S. 265, 108 S.Ct. 1130, 99 L. Ed. 2d 289 (1988); Hinson v. Holt, [Ms. 2970541, Nov. 20, 1998] ___ So.2d ___ (Ala.Civ.App. 1998); and Littleton v. Gold Kist, Inc., 480 So.2d 1236 (Ala.Civ.App. 1985).

Appellee's motion for damages and attorney's fees pursuant to Rule 38, Ala.R.App.P. and §§ 12-19-271 and 12-19-272, Ala. Code 1975, is denied.

Robertson, P.J., and Yates and Crawley, JJ., concur.

MONROE, Judge, concurring specially.

I wish to point out that Culbreth made an offer of judgment on September 18, 1996, just seven weeks after Mills filed the complaint in this case. The offer of judgment was made before depositions were taken, and obviously before the motion for summary judgment was filed and the trial was held. Rule 68, Ala.R.Civ.P., provides that, "[i]f the judgment finally obtained by the offeree is not more favorable that the offer, the offeree must pay the costs incurred after making of the offer."

Because nearly all of the costs incurred by the defendant arose after she made the offer of judgment, and because it appears that all the costs were necessary in defending the case, I agree that the trial court correctly enforced the taxation of costs.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MILLS v. CULBRETH
(Jul 16, 1999)