Stroman v. Gay

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Stroman v. Gay

532 So. 2d 648, 1988 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 235, 1988 WL 78473

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedJuly 27, 1988

DocketCiv. 6593

StatusPublished

This text of 532 So. 2d 648 (Stroman v. Gay) 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

Stroman v. Gay, 532 So. 2d 648, 1988 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 235, 1988 WL 78473 (Ala. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

INGRAM, Judge.

Plaintiff and others filed an action to quiet title against the defendants. Plaintiff contends that she is the owner of certain property and that she has never conveyed the property to the defendants or their predecessors in interest. The defendants moved for summary judgment. Accompanying this motion was a warranty deed from the plaintiff to the ancestor of the defendants concerning the land in question. The plaintiff never responded to the motion. The trial court then granted the defendants’ motion and, thus, this appeal.

At the outset, we note that Rule 56, Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, is quite clear that once a summary judgment motion is made and supported, an adverse party may not rest upon mere allegations or denials in his pleadings. Rather, he must respond and show that there is a genuine issue for trial. If he does not respond, then summary judgment, if appropriate, should be entered against him.

Here, as noted above, the deed presented by the defendants clearly showed that the plaintiff had transferred title to the land in question to the defendants’ ancestor. As there was no response of any kind by the plaintiff, we cannot say that the trial court erred.

This case is due to be affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

BRADLEY, P.J., and HOLMES, J., concur.

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

INGRAM, Judge.

Plaintiff and others filed an action to quiet title against the defendants. Plaintiff contends that she is the owner of certain property and that she has never conveyed the property to the defendants or their predecessors in interest. The defendants moved for summary judgment. Accompanying this motion was a warranty deed from the plaintiff to the ancestor of the defendants concerning the land in question. The plaintiff never responded to the motion. The trial court then granted the defendants’ motion and, thus, this appeal.

At the outset, we note that Rule 56, Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, is quite clear that once a summary judgment motion is made and supported, an adverse party may not rest upon mere allegations or denials in his pleadings. Rather, he must respond and show that there is a genuine issue for trial. If he does not respond, then summary judgment, if appropriate, should be entered against him.

Here, as noted above, the deed presented by the defendants clearly showed that the plaintiff had transferred title to the land in question to the defendants’ ancestor. As there was no response of any kind by the plaintiff, we cannot say that the trial court erred.

This case is due to be affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

BRADLEY, P.J., and HOLMES, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

532 So. 2d 648, 1988 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 235, 1988 WL 78473, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stroman-v-gay-alacivapp-1988.