Sharer v. Sharer

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Sharer v. Sharer

586 So. 2d 927, 1991 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 380, 1991 WL 108391

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedJune 21, 1991

Docket2900246

StatusPublished

This text of 586 So. 2d 927 (Sharer v. Sharer) 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

Sharer v. Sharer, 586 So. 2d 927, 1991 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 380, 1991 WL 108391 (Ala. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

ROBERTSON, Presiding Judge.

This case concerns post-divorce litigation.

The husband contends on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his motion to recuse. However, his brief fails to comply with Rule 28, A.R.App.P. The husband fails to support his contentions with any authority.

This court has stated on many occasions that a party who fails to comply with Rule 28 places himself in a perilous position. Stover v. Alabama Farm Bureau Insurance Co., 467 So.2d 251 (Ala.1985). In such a situation, this court may dismiss the appeal pursuant to Rule 2, A.R.App.P. Alternatively, we may simply affirm the judgment of the trial court. Cummins v. Slayton, 545 So.2d 783 (Ala.Civ.App.1989). In this instance, we choose to affirm the judgment of the trial court.

This case is due to be affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

THIGPEN and RUSSELL, JJ., concur.

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