Wolff III v. Colonial Bank

Supreme Court of Alabama

Wolff III v. Colonial Bank

612 So. 2d 1146, 1992 Ala. LEXIS 971, 1992 WL 201008

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedAugust 21, 1992

Docket1910815

StatusPublished

Cited by28 cases

This text of 612 So. 2d 1146 (Wolff III v. Colonial Bank) 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

Wolff III v. Colonial Bank, 612 So. 2d 1146, 1992 Ala. LEXIS 971, 1992 WL 201008 (Ala. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

The trial court's dismissal of the plaintiff's case for failure to comply with discovery orders is affirmed. Discovery matters are within the trial court's sound discretion, and its ruling on those matters will not be reversed absent a showing of abuse of discretion and substantial harm to the appellant.Smith v. Wilcox County Board of Education,365 So.2d 659 (Ala. 1978); Selby v. Money, 403 So.2d 218 (Ala. 1981); Riddlesprigger v. Ervin, 519 So.2d 486, 487 (Ala. 1987); Iverson v. Xpert Tune, Inc., 553 So.2d 82 (Ala. 1989); Ragan v. Blazon Flexible Flyer, Inc.,590 So.2d 882 (Ala. 1991); and Napier v. McDougal,601 So.2d 446 (Ala. 1992). We have carefully scrutinized the record, and find no abuse of discretion.

Because we are affirming the trial court's dismissal of this case, we deny Colonial Bank's motions to strike material from the record.

MOTIONS TO STRIKE DENIED; AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and SHORES, HOUSTON and KENNEDY, JJ., concur.

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

The trial court's dismissal of the plaintiff's case for failure to comply with discovery orders is affirmed. Discovery matters are within the trial court's sound discretion, and its ruling on those matters will not be reversed absent a showing of abuse of discretion and substantial harm to the appellant.Smith v. Wilcox County Board of Education,365 So.2d 659 (Ala. 1978); Selby v. Money, 403 So.2d 218 (Ala. 1981); Riddlesprigger v. Ervin, 519 So.2d 486, 487 (Ala. 1987); Iverson v. Xpert Tune, Inc., 553 So.2d 82 (Ala. 1989); Ragan v. Blazon Flexible Flyer, Inc.,590 So.2d 882 (Ala. 1991); and Napier v. McDougal,601 So.2d 446 (Ala. 1992). We have carefully scrutinized the record, and find no abuse of discretion.

Because we are affirming the trial court's dismissal of this case, we deny Colonial Bank's motions to strike material from the record.

MOTIONS TO STRIKE DENIED; AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and SHORES, HOUSTON and KENNEDY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

612 So. 2d 1146, 1992 Ala. LEXIS 971, 1992 WL 201008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wolff-iii-v-colonial-bank-ala-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack