McConico v. Garrison

Supreme Court of Alabama

McConico v. Garrison

559 So. 2d 175, 1990 Ala. LEXIS 141, 1990 WL 44385

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedMarch 2, 1990

Docket88-1491

StatusPublished

This text of 559 So. 2d 175 (McConico v. Garrison) 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

McConico v. Garrison, 559 So. 2d 175, 1990 Ala. LEXIS 141, 1990 WL 44385 (Ala. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

MADDOX, Justice.

James McConico, Jr., filed a pro se lawsuit against W. Lewis Garrison, Jr., alleging that Garrison had slandered him by calling him a “jailhouse lawyer.” This allegedly slanderous statement occurred during litigation between McConico and Garrison’s law firm involving a closing on some real estate. During that litigation, Garrison, in a motion to dismiss, referred to McConico as a “jailhouse lawyer.” At the time, McConico was confined to prison and was representing himself. The trial court in this case granted Garrison’s motion for summary judgment.

We have carefully examined the record and considered the briefs of the parties, and we conclude that the trial court did not err in entering summary judgment for Garrison. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and ALMON, ADAMS and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.

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

MADDOX, Justice.

James McConico, Jr., filed a pro se lawsuit against W. Lewis Garrison, Jr., alleging that Garrison had slandered him by calling him a “jailhouse lawyer.” This allegedly slanderous statement occurred during litigation between McConico and Garrison’s law firm involving a closing on some real estate. During that litigation, Garrison, in a motion to dismiss, referred to McConico as a “jailhouse lawyer.” At the time, McConico was confined to prison and was representing himself. The trial court in this case granted Garrison’s motion for summary judgment.

We have carefully examined the record and considered the briefs of the parties, and we conclude that the trial court did not err in entering summary judgment for Garrison. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and ALMON, ADAMS and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

559 So. 2d 175, 1990 Ala. LEXIS 141, 1990 WL 44385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcconico-v-garrison-ala-1990.