Garner v. Decatur Utilities

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Garner v. Decatur Utilities

709 So. 2d 1309, 1998 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 151, 1998 WL 68897

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedFebruary 20, 1998

Docket2970072

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 709 So. 2d 1309 (Garner v. Decatur Utilities) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Garner v. Decatur Utilities, 709 So. 2d 1309, 1998 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 151, 1998 WL 68897 (Ala. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Leonard D. Garner sued Decatur Utilities, seeking workers' compensation benefits and alleging retaliatory discharge. Decatur Utilities filed a motion to dismiss the retaliatory discharge claim; the trial court granted that motion. Garner appeals from that dismissal. Because his workers' compensation claim remains pending in the trial court, we must dismiss the appeal.

An appeal ordinarily lies only from a final judgment. Ala. Code 1975, § 12-22-2; Bean v. Craig, 557 So.2d 1249, 1253 (Ala. 1990). A judgment is generally not final unless allclaims or the rights or liabilities of all parties have been decided. Ex parte Harris, 506 So.2d 1003, 1004 (Ala.Civ.App. 1987) (emphasis added). The only exception to this rule of finality is when the trial court directs the entry of a final judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b), Ala. R. Civ. P. Bean, 557 So.2d at 1253. This appeal is from the dismissal of one of Garner's two claims. Because the other claim remains pending, this court cannot now reach the merits of this case.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

ROBERTSON, P.J., and YATES, MONROE, and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

Leonard D. Garner sued Decatur Utilities, seeking workers' compensation benefits and alleging retaliatory discharge. Decatur Utilities filed a motion to dismiss the retaliatory discharge claim; the trial court granted that motion. Garner appeals from that dismissal. Because his workers' compensation claim remains pending in the trial court, we must dismiss the appeal.

An appeal ordinarily lies only from a final judgment. Ala. Code 1975, § 12-22-2; Bean v. Craig, 557 So.2d 1249, 1253 (Ala. 1990). A judgment is generally not final unless allclaims or the rights or liabilities of all parties have been decided. Ex parte Harris, 506 So.2d 1003, 1004 (Ala.Civ.App. 1987) (emphasis added). The only exception to this rule of finality is when the trial court directs the entry of a final judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b), Ala. R. Civ. P. Bean, 557 So.2d at 1253. This appeal is from the dismissal of one of Garner's two claims. Because the other claim remains pending, this court cannot now reach the merits of this case.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

ROBERTSON, P.J., and YATES, MONROE, and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

709 So. 2d 1309, 1998 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 151, 1998 WL 68897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garner-v-decatur-utilities-alacivapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack