McKnight v. Weaver

634 So. 2d 588, 1994 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 40, 1994 WL 20872
CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama
DecidedJanuary 28, 1994
DocketAV93000144
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 634 So. 2d 588 (McKnight v. Weaver) 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
McKnight v. Weaver, 634 So. 2d 588, 1994 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 40, 1994 WL 20872 (Ala. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinion

RICHARD L. HOLMES, Retired Appellate Judge.

The plaintiffs sued the defendants. The trial court, after an ore tenus hearing, found in favor of the plaintiffs.

The defendants appeal, contending that the trial court erred in awarding damages in favor of the plaintiffs. This case is before this court pursuant to Ala.Code 1975, § 12-2-7(6).

The brief of the defendants does not comply with Rule 28, A.R.A.P.

The defendants’ brief cites general authority relative to the “clean hands” doctrine; however, no specific argument is made, nor is authority cited, to support its application to the facts found or judgment rendered by the trial court.

Additionally, the brief of the defendants does not cite any part of the record or transcript of the evidence in support of the alleged error committed by the trial court.

Appellants who fail to comply with Rule 28, A.R.A.P., place themselves in a perilous position, and under appropriate circumstances, an appellate court will refuse to consider their appeal. Stover v. Alabama Farm Bureau Insurance Co., 467 So.2d 251 (Ala.1985). This case is such an appropriate circumstance.

Additionally, an appellate court is left with no choice but to affirm the trial court where the appellant’s brief is either lacking the required parts or such parts are not readily discernible. Braxton v. Stewart, 539 So.2d 284 (Ala.Civ.App.1988).

For the above, and other reasons, this case is due to be affirmed.

The foregoing opinion was prepared by Retired Appellate Judge RICHARD L. HOLMES while serving on active duty status as a judge of this court under the provisions of § 12-18-10(e), Code 1975, and this opinion is hereby adopted as that of the court.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.

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

Related

Figures v. Figures
646 So. 2d 62 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
634 So. 2d 588, 1994 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 40, 1994 WL 20872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcknight-v-weaver-alacivapp-1994.