Beasley v. Parsons Steel, Inc.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Beasley v. Parsons Steel, Inc.

534 So. 2d 582, 1988 Ala. LEXIS 454, 1988 WL 103057

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedSeptember 2, 1988

Docket87-914

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 534 So. 2d 582 (Beasley v. Parsons Steel, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beasley v. Parsons Steel, Inc., 534 So. 2d 582, 1988 Ala. LEXIS 454, 1988 WL 103057 (Ala. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendants appeal (Rule 5, Ala.R. App.P.) from an order of the trial court of September 23, 1986, amended April 21, 1988, denying their motion for summary judgment on the plaintiffs’ claims for breach of contract and malpractice and on their claim for an accounting. That order is affirmed.

The record and briefs on these issues, submitted in Parsons Steel, Inc. v. Beasley, 522 So.2d 253 (Ala.1988), indicate that questions of fact exist to preclude disposition of these issues on summary judgment.

AFFIRMED.

TORBERT, C.J., and MADDOX, JONES, ALMON, SHORES, BEATTY, ADAMS and STEAGALL, JJ., concur. HOUSTON, J., recused.

HOUSTON, Justice

(recusing).

Dehors the record, I have been informed that my son-in-law is attorney for the trustee in the Parsons Steel, Inc., bankruptcy proceeding. I recuse in all cases in which he is an attorney for one of the litigants. Even though the trustee in bankruptcy is not a litigant here, if Parsons Steel, Inc., prevails in this case, this may inure to the benefit of the trustee in bankruptcy. For this reason only, I recuse myself.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI