Spradlin v. Drennen Cadillac Company, Inc.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Spradlin v. Drennen Cadillac Company, Inc.

578 So. 2d 1251, 1991 WL 82151, 1991 Ala. LEXIS 424

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedApril 11, 1991

Docket1900043

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 578 So. 2d 1251 (Spradlin v. Drennen Cadillac Company, Inc.) 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

Spradlin v. Drennen Cadillac Company, Inc., 578 So. 2d 1251, 1991 WL 82151, 1991 Ala. LEXIS 424 (Ala. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

ON REHEARING EX MERO MOTU

PER CURIAM.

The opinion of April 5, 1991, is withdrawn and the following is substituted therefor:

This appeal is dismissed because the appellant has failed to submit an argument that contains the “contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes, and parts of the record relied on.” See A.R.App.P. 28(a)(5) and Stephens v. Lindsey, 542 So.2d 278 (Ala.1989).

ORIGINAL OPINION WITHDRAWN; OPINION SUBSTITUTED; DISMISSED.

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

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