Gulf Coast Media v. Mobile Press

470 So. 2d 1211, 11 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2347, 1985 Ala. LEXIS 3722
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedMay 10, 1985
Docket83-625
StatusPublished
Cited by30 cases

This text of 470 So. 2d 1211 (Gulf Coast Media v. Mobile Press) 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
Gulf Coast Media v. Mobile Press, 470 So. 2d 1211, 11 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2347, 1985 Ala. LEXIS 3722 (Ala. 1985).

Opinions

This appeal arose out of a declaratory judgment action to determine whether the publication known as Baldwin People is qualified to publish legal advertising in Baldwin County, pursuant to Code 1975, § 6-8-60.

Gulf Coast Media, Inc., owns four local newspapers in Baldwin County. Gulf Coast Media brought this action against the Mobile Press Register, Inc., as owner of the Baldwin People. Published weekly, the Baldwin People is circulated as an insert in the Thursday edition of the Mobile Register (morning paper) and theMobile Press (afternoon paper) and mailed from Mobile to Baldwin County or sold in Baldwin County newsstands. The publication carries news of interest to Baldwin County residents and advertisements primarily from Baldwin County advertisers. The Baldwin People has Baldwin County offices in Bay Minette, Foley, and Fairhope.

The trial court, sitting without a jury, held that theBaldwin People is qualified under Alabama Code § 6-8-60 to publish legal notices in Baldwin County. Gulf Coast Media appeals.

Alabama's legal notice statute, Alabama Code 1975, § 6-8-60 provides as follows: *Page 1213

"The party in interest or at whose instance the publication of notice is to be given by advertisement in a newspaper may designate the newspaper in which such advertisement shall be made. If the officer charged with the duty of making the advertisement disregards such designation and makes advertisement in some other paper, he must pay the cost thereof and shall not be entitled to reimbursement; but all publications required by any law, mortgage or other contract to be published in a newspaper must be published in any newspaper printed in the English language which has a general circulation in the county, regardless of where the paper is printed, if the principal editorial office of the newspaper is located within the county and which newspaper shall have been mailed under the second class mailing privilege of the United States postal service from the post office where it is published for at least 51 weeks a year."

The Mobile Press Register contends that the statute should be broadly construed. It argues that the mandates of the statute are satisfied if its general purpose, to give legal notice, is achieved. We disagree.

The cardinal rule for construction of a statute is to ascertain the legislative intent, which must be determined by examining the statute as a whole in light of its general purpose. Vick v. Bishop, 252 Ala. 250, 40 So.2d 845 (1949);State ex. rel. Moore v. Strickland, 289 Ala. 488, 268 So.2d 766 (1972). Legal notice statutes are principally designed to assure that notice of legal or official proceedings is given to those persons who have or who may have an interest therein. This purpose is best served by a newspaper with a fixed local character. Annot. 26 A.L.R.2d 655, 662 (1952).

While many jurisdictions utilizing this approach suggest a broad or liberal construction of legal notice statutes, seee.g. Dearborn Independent, Inc. v. City of Dearborn, 331 Mich. 447, 49 N.W.2d 370 (1951); Wymore Arbor State, Inc. v. Korinek,182 Neb. 557, 156 N.W.2d 24 (1968), we are of the opinion that strict compliance with the plain language of § 6-8-60 is more appropriate in this case. To hold otherwise would be to emasculate the express statutory requirements of the statute. It is presumed that the legislature does not use statutory language without any meaning or application. Robinson v. State,361 So.2d 1113 (Ala. 1978); Wright v. Cutler-Hammer, Inc.,358 So.2d 444 (Ala. 1978).

If we have strict compliance with the specific statutory requirements, an individual seeking notice could expect, and would be able, to find a required notice within a limited number of county newspapers. An individual would not need, as in the instant case, to purchase and look in the Mobile papers to find legal notices from Baldwin County. To hold otherwise might force those looking for a legal notice to make the proverbial search for a needle in a haystack.

Thus in order to determine whether the Baldwin People is qualified to publish legal notices for Baldwin County, we must determine whether the express mandates of the statute have been complied with.

Section 6-8-60 provides that legal notices must be published in a newspaper printed in the English language which has a general circulation in the county. While it is uncontroverted that the Baldwin People is printed in the English language, and that it has a general circulation in Baldwin County, we must initially address the issue of whether the Baldwin People qualifies as a newspaper.

Although the term "newspaper" has not been defined by statute or case law in Alabama, several definitions can be found in the case law from other jurisdictions. 66 C.J.S. Newspapers § 1 (1950). In Caldor, Inc. v. Heffernan, 183 Conn. 566,440 A.2d 767 (1981), the Connecticut Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether an advertising supplement inserted into a newspaper qualifies as a newspaper for tax exemption status. In reaching its conclusion, the Connecticut court reviewed the definition of *Page 1214 the term "newspaper" as articulated by other jurisdictions, and determined:

"All the definitions identify two common characteristics of a newspaper: (1) It is published at short, regular intervals, usually not exceeding a week, and (2) it routinely reports a myriad of topics so that it appeals, at least in part, to a wide spectrum of the general public."

Caldor, supra, 183 Conn. at 572, 440 A.2d at 770-71.

While we recognize that according to this broad definition the Baldwin People could be characterized as a newspaper, we nevertheless conclude that such a publication loses its status as a newspaper, for purposes of the legal notice statute, when it is inserted into and distributed with a parent newspaper.

In Friedman's Express, Inc. v. Mirror Transp. Co., 71 F. Supp. 991 (D.N.J. 1947), aff'd, 169 F.2d 504 (3d Cir. 1948), the court found that the comic section was an "integral part" of a newspaper for taxation purposes. The court held that it was the sum total of all of the sections and features which makes up the entire publication known as a newspaper:

"All of this melange is contained in what are known as special sections of the paper. There is the advertising section, the home section, the magazine section, the financial section, the sports section and the news section, each with its appeal to various members of the family.

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

Related

Jefferson County v. Weissman
69 So. 3d 827 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 2011)
Etowah Cty. Civic Center Auth. v. Hotel Ser.
974 So. 2d 964 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 2007)
Gannett River States Publishing Corp. v. Jackson Advocate
856 So. 2d 247 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 2003)
Turner v. State
746 So. 2d 355 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1998)
King v. State
674 So. 2d 1381 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1995)
Opinion No.
Arkansas Attorney General Reports, 1993
Cure v. State
600 So. 2d 415 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1992)
Tyler v. State
587 So. 2d 1238 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1991)
Siegelman v. Chase Manhattan Bank
575 So. 2d 1041 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1991)
Alabama State Board of Education v. Brown
565 So. 2d 256 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1990)
Norton v. Mobile County
562 So. 2d 503 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1990)
Decatur City Board of Education v. Aycock
562 So. 2d 1331 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1990)
Kirkland v. State
529 So. 2d 1036 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1988)
First State Bank of Atmore v. Thompson
538 So. 2d 25 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1987)
Ex Parte CSX Transp., Inc.
533 So. 2d 613 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1987)
Hamilton v. Walker County.
521 So. 2d 34 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1987)
Daniels v. Bowers
518 So. 2d 736 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1987)
BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF AL. v. Protective Life Ins. Co.
527 So. 2d 125 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
470 So. 2d 1211, 11 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2347, 1985 Ala. LEXIS 3722, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gulf-coast-media-v-mobile-press-ala-1985.