72 So. 3d 1258
Ala. Civ. App.2011Background
- Isbell purchased a vehicle from Rogers Auto Sales on January 7, 2006 and later claimed Rogers would finance the purchase.
- Isbell filed suit January 26, 2006 in St. Clair District Court, later moved to St. Clair Circuit Court, alleging fraud, wantonness, and breach of contract; Rogers repossessed the vehicle shortly after the complaint.
- Rogers and owner Roger Ragan moved for summary judgment on May 14, 2010, arguing financing would have occurred post-piling bankruptcy and repossession followed contract terms.
- Defendants attached Isbell’s bill of sale, title application, and a Right of Repossession acknowledging Rogers’ right to repossess upon default.
- Isbell countered with deposition testimony showing Rogers had promised financing, that her payments were current, and that there were genuine issues of material fact; the trial court granted summary judgment June 21, 2010.
- Isbell sought Rule 59(g) relief, requesting a hearing on the postjudgment motion; the trial court did not hold a hearing and denied relief October 14, 2010 by operation of law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by not holding a hearing on Isbell’s Rule 59(g) postjudgment motion | Isbell requested a hearing; Rule 59(g) requires a hearing when requested. | Trial court could rule on the motion without a separate hearing and the evidence supports summary judgment. | Reversal and remand; trial court must hold the requested hearing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Flagstar Enters., Inc. v. Foster, 779 So. 2d 1220 (Ala. 2000) (Rule 59(g) hearing must be held if requested; harmless error may apply otherwise)
- Greene v. Thompson, 554 So. 2d 376 (Ala. 1989) (harmless error when no meritorious grounds or controlling law foreclose relief)
- Ex parte Owen, 860 So. 2d 877 (Ala. 2003) (circumstances permitting consideration of late or additional evidence)
- McDowell v. Burford, 646 So. 2d 1327 (Ala. 1994) (circumstances preventing timely submission of evidence can be addressed without formal affidavits)