Guardian Builders, LLC v. Uselton
Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary
Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Supreme Court of Alabama?
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More ›
You already receive new opinion summaries from Supreme Court of Alabama. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
Guardian Builders, LLC, and Wayne Tackett (collectively "Guardian") appealed an order that denied its motion to vacate or modify an arbitration award entered in favor of Randy and Melissa Uselton. In April 2010, the Useltons sued Guardian alleging several claims arising from Guardian's construction of a house. Guardian subsequently filed a motion to compel arbitration, and the circuit court granted that motion. The arbitrator entered a final award in favor of the Useltons in the amount of $452,275.20. Upon review, the Supreme Court construed Guardian's motion to vacate or modify the arbitration award of as a notice of appeal under Rule 71B, thus effectuating the appeal of the award to the circuit court. However, because the clerk of the circuit court never entered the award as the judgment of that court, the circuit court's order denying Guardian's motion to vacate or modify was void. "Essentially, Guardian's appeal remains pending in the circuit court, awaiting further procedures under Rule 71B. Further, because Guardian has appealed from the arbitration award under Rule 71B, that award could not be entered as the judgment of the court under 71C. Thus, the circuit court lacked authority to enter a judgment on the award under Rule 71C and to award Better Business Bureau fees and facility costs in connection with the entry of that judgment."
Download PDF
Rel: 5/31/13 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e Reporter of Decisions, A l a b a m a A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ( ( 3 3 4 ) 2 2 9 ¬ 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013 1111375 Guardian B u i l d e r s , LLC, and Wayne T a c k e t t v. Randy U s e l t o n and M e l i s s a U s e l t o n Appeal from Madison C i r c u i t (CV-09-901074) BRYAN, Court Justice. Guardian Builders, L L C , a n d Wayne T a c k e t t (collectively " G u a r d i a n " ) a p p e a l f r o m an o r d e r p u r p o r t i n g t o deny motion t o vacate o r modify an a r b i t r a t i o n Guardian's award e n t e r e d i n 1111375 favor o f Randy U s e l t o n and M e l i s s a U s e l t o n . We vacate the o r d e r and d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l . I n A p r i l 2010, the U s e l t o n s sued Guardian i n the Madison C i r c u i t C o u r t , a l l e g i n g s e v e r a l c l a i m s a r i s i n g from Guardian's construction of subsequently filed circuit court a of January the 11, a motion granted December 2 1 , 2 0 1 1 , favor house the motion i n the Guardian Useltons. t o compel the a r b i t r a t o r Useltons 2012, that for arbitration, in October with of the On award $452,275.20. the circuit m o t i o n t o v a c a t e o r m o d i f y t h e a r b i t r a t i o n award, a t t a c h e d a copy o f t h e a r b i t r a t i o n and 2010. entered a f i n a l amount filed Guardian award. On May in On court a to which i t 15, 2012, the U s e l t o n s f i l e d a "motion t o c o n f i r m " the a r b i t r a t i o n award and a r e s p o n s e t o G u a r d i a n ' s m o t i o n t o v a c a t e o r m o d i f y . On May 31, 2012, t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t e n t e r e d an o r d e r p u r p o r t i n g t o deny G u a r d i a n ' s motion to vacate or modify the arbitration award, p u r p o r t i n g t o g r a n t t h e U s e l t o n s ' m o t i o n t o c o n f i r m t h e arbitration award, $1,421.75 i n B e t t e r and purporting B u s i n e s s Bureau r e l a t e d to the a r b i t r a t i o n . to order Guardian f e e s and facility Guardian appealed. 2 to pay costs 1111375 The U s e l t o n s move t h i s C o u r t t o d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l on the ground t h a t G u a r d i a n f a i l e d t o comply w i t h the r e q u i r e m e n t s of R u l e 71B, A l a . R. C i v . P., which e s t a b l i s h e s the procedure f o r a p p e a l i n g an a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d t o t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t . Rule provides: "(a) Who may appeal. Any party to a r b i t r a t i o n may f i l e a n o t i c e of appeal from a w a r d e n t e r e d as a r e s u l t o f t h e a r b i t r a t i o n . an the "(b) When f i l e d . The n o t i c e o f a p p e a l s h a l l be filed within thirty (30) d a y s a f t e r s e r v i c e o f n o t i c e of the a r b i t r a t i o n award. F a i l u r e to f i l e w i t h i n t h i r t y (30) d a y s s h a l l c o n s t i t u t e a w a i v e r o f the r i g h t to review. " ( c ) Where f i l e d . The n o t i c e o f a p p e a l s h a l l f i l e d w i t h t h e c l e r k o f t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t where a c t i o n u n d e r l y i n g the a r b i t r a t i o n i s pending or a c t i o n i s pending i n the c i r c u i t c o u r t , then the o f f i c e of the c l e r k of the c i r c u i t c o u r t of c o u n t y where t h e a w a r d i s made. be the i f in the "(d) What f i l e d . W i t h t h e n o t i c e o f a p p e a l , t h e a p p e l l a n t s h a l l f i l e a c o p y o f t h e a w a r d , s i g n e d by t h e a r b i t r a t o r , i f t h e r e i s o n l y one, o r by a majority of the arbitrators, along with the s u b m i s s i o n t o t h e a r b i t r a t o r o r a r b i t r a t o r s and any s u p p o r t i n g documents o r r e c o r d o f t h e proceedings, if available. I f no r e c o r d i s a v a i l a b l e , t h e a p p e l l a n t s h a l l so s t a t e . I f a r e c o r d i s t o be prepared but i s not completed w i t h i n the time provided i n paragraph (b) of this rule, the a p p e l l a n t s h a l l so s t a t e i n t h e n o t i c e o f a p p e a l and s h a l l f i l e t h e r e c o r d w i t h i n t h i r t y (30) d a y s a f t e r the f i l i n g of the n o t i c e of appeal, u n l e s s the c o u r t f o r good c a u s e shown s h a l l a l l o w a d d i t i o n a l t i m e . 3 71B 1111375 " ( e ) How s e r v e d . I f t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a r o s e o u t of a p e n d i n g a c t i o n , s e r v i c e s h a l l be made as p r o v i d e d i n R u l e 5 [ , A l a . R. C i v . P . ] . I f t h e r e i s no a c t i o n p e n d i n g , s e r v i c e s h a l l be made as p r o v i d e d i n R u l e s 4 t h r o u g h 4 . 4 [ , A l a . R. C i v . P . , ] a n d upon any c o u n s e l who a p p e a r e d i n t h e a r b i t r a t i o n f o r t h e party being served. "(f) Procedure a f t e r f i l i n g . The c l e r k o f t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t p r o m p t l y s h a l l e n t e r t h e a w a r d as t h e f i n a l judgment o f t h e c o u r t . T h e r e a f t e r , as a condition precedent to further r e v i e w b y any a p p e l l a t e c o u r t , a n y p a r t y o p p o s e d t o t h e a w a r d may f i l e , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h R u l e 59, [ A l a . R. C i v . P . , ] a motion t o s e t a s i d e o r vacate t h e judgment based upon one o r more o f t h e g r o u n d s s p e c i f i e d i n A l a . Code 1975, § 6-6-14, o r o t h e r a p p l i c a b l e l a w . The c o u r t s h a l l n o t g r a n t any s u c h m o t i o n u n t i l a reasonable time after a l l parties are served pursuant t o paragraph (e) o f t h i s rule. The d i s p o s i t i o n o f any s u c h m o t i o n i s s u b j e c t t o c i v i l and appellate rules applicable t o o r d e r s and judgments i n c i v i l a c t i o n s . "(g) A p p e l l a t e r e v i e w . An a p p e a l may be t a k e n f r o m t h e g r a n t o r d e n i a l o f a n y R u l e 59 m o t i o n c h a l l e n g i n g t h e award by f i l i n g a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l to t h e a p p r o p r i a t e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 4 , [ A l a . R. C i v . P . ] . " Thus, R u l e 71B e s t a b l i s h e s t h e a p p e a l o f an a r b i t r a t i o n the following procedure f o r a w a r d : (1) A p a r t y must f i l e a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l w i t h t h e a p p r o p r i a t e c i r c u i t c o u r t w i t h i n 30 d a y s a f t e r s e r v i c e o f t h e n o t i c e o f t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d ; (2) the c l e r k o f t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t s h a l l p r o m p t l y e n t e r t h e award as t h e f i n a l j u d g m e n t o f t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t ; (3) t h e a g g r i e v e d 4 1111375 p a r t y may or file vacate a R u l e 59, A l a . R. C i v . P., m o t i o n t o s e t a s i d e the judgment, precedent to further and such r e v i e w by filing any is a condition a p p e l l a t e c o u r t ; ( 4 ) the c i r c u i t c o u r t g r a n t s o r d e n i e s t h e R u l e 59 m o t i o n ; and ( 5 ) t h e aggrieved party may then appeal from judgment t o the a p p r o p r i a t e a p p e l l a t e the circuit court's court. e v e d p a r t y has no a r b i t r a t i o n award the c i r c u i t c o u r t r\ f r o m t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d w i t h i n 30 days o f s e r v i c e o f t h e n o t i c e o f t h e a w a r d and has t i m e l y f i l e d a R u l e 59 m o t i o n t o s e t a s i d e o r v a c a t e t h e j u d g m e n t on t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d as d e s c r i b e d a b o v e . " IT J C o m m i t t e e Comments t o R u l e 71B E f f e c t i v e : F e b r u a r y 1, _ 2009. I n t h i s case, Guardian never f i l e d w i t h the c i r c u i t c o u r t a document titled a "notice of appeal." Rather, Guardian a t t e m p t e d t o a p p e a l f r o m t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d by f i l i n g w i t h the c i r c u i t c o u r t a motion to vacate or modify the arbitration a w a r d , w h i c h G u a r d i a n f i l e d w i t h i n 30 days o f t h e e n t r y o f t h e award. The U s e l t o n s a r g u e t h a t G u a r d i a n does n o t have a r i g h t to a p p e l l a t e r e v i e w because G u a r d i a n d i d not f i l e appeal; instead, Conversely, modify i t filed Guardian the a r b i t r a t i o n a n o t i c e of o n l y a motion to vacate or modify. argues that a w a r d may 5 i t s motion be to vacate c o n s t r u e d t o be both or a 1111375 n o t i c e o f a p p e a l and a R u l e 59 m o t i o n , f i l e d p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 71B. In LLP, J.L. 55 similar in the So. Loper 3d Construction 1152 situation. v. ( A l a . 2010), Findout this adverse to Loper. court a motion Partnership, Court I n L o p e r , an a r b i t r a t o r f a v o r o f F i n d o u t and circuit Co. addressed e n t e r e d an Loper filed t o s e t a s i d e the award. a award with Findout s u b s e q u e n t l y moved t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t t o c o n f i r m t h e award, and Loper filed a motion c o l l e c t t h e award. F i n d o u t from attempting to Although Loper d i d not f i l e appeal," the c i r c u i t to enjoin c o u r t t r e a t e d the motions a "notice f i l e d by of Loper t h e m o t i o n t o s e t a s i d e t h e a w a r d and t h e m o t i o n t o e n j o i n enforcement under of the award R u l e 71B. order). The 55 So. circuit "'as an a p p e a l o f t h [ e ] a w a r d ' " 3d a t 1157 (quoting c i r c u i t c o u r t ordered the c l e r k court to e n t e r the a r b i t r a t i o n motion, and Loper's motion circuit a w a r d as t h e j u d g m e n t o f court i n accordance w i t h Rule 71B(f). considered of the court's to The set aside, granted that motion. Court. 6 circuit that court then i . e . , i t s Rule Findout appealed to 59 this 1111375 In Loper, failure to appeal," Court a separate file in precluded this addition further to did conclude document the appellate not two titled motions review. that a Loper's "notice filed by of Loper, Instead, i t noted that the c i r c u i t c o u r t had c o n s i d e r e d L o p e r ' s motions challenging the arbitration the This Court award then as a notice of appeal reviewed the m e r i t s of the of award. c i r c u i t court's j u d g m e n t s e t t i n g a s i d e t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d and r e v e r s e d t h a t judgment. Thus, b a s e d on Loper, the circuit court i n this c a s e c o u l d have t r e a t e d G u a r d i a n ' s m o t i o n t o v a c a t e o r m o d i f y as a notice of a p p e a l . Guardian a t t a c h e d to that motion a copy o f t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d and s e r v e d a copy o f t h e m o t i o n on t h e U s e l t o n s ; t h a t m o t i o n p r o v i d e d n o t i c e t h a t G u a r d i a n appealing the award. We construe Guardian's motion n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i n t h i s c a s e ; h o w e v e r , we e m p h a s i z e avoid potential of for a p p e a l i n g e s t a b l i s h e d by R u l e Although modify address we construe the a r b i t r a t i o n additional Guardian's concerning 7 a review procedure 71B. motion a w a r d as a n o t i c e issues as that, to confusion, a party desiring appellate an a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d s h o u l d f o l l o w t h e e x p l i c i t was to vacate o f a p p e a l , we the procedure or must for 1111375 appealing an arbitration importantly, after award Guardian used in appealed this to the case. Most circuit court, i . e . , a f t e r i t f i l e d i t s m o t i o n t o v a c a t e o r m o d i f y the award, there i s no entered indication that the clerk of the circuit court t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d as t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h a t c o u r t r e q u i r e d by R u l e 7 1 B ( f ) . of the circuit court That r u l e p r o v i d e s promptly shall enter that "[t]he as clerk t h e a w a r d as the f i n a l judgment o f the c o u r t " a f t e r the f i l i n g o f the n o t i c e o f appeal i n that court. Rule 71B, which became e f f e c t i v e on F e b r u a r y 1, 2009, s u p e r s e d e d t h e p r o c e d u r e e s t a b l i s h e d by § 6¬ 6-15, Ala. Effective Code 1975. Committee Rule 71B t h e method f o r t a k i n g an a p p e a l f r o m an a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d and supersedes procedure provided Parham v. American 1102, n.2 1104 procedure similar by A l a . Code 1975, Bankers ( A l a . 2009) . established in ( " [ R u l e 71B] to clarifies the F e b r u a r y 1, 2009 Comments some by § respects; I n s . Co. of § 6-6-15."); Florida, 24 So. and 3d A l t h o u g h R u l e 71B s u p e r s e d e d the 6-6-15, procedures are informs our that the two similarity d i s c u s s i o n on t h e e f f e c t o f t h e n o n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h R u l e 7 1 B ( f ) in this case. 8 1111375 Under § 6-6-15, a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d by court. 462, a party initiated an appeal from f i l i n g a n o t i c e of appeal i n the circuit See g e n e r a l l y H o r t o n Homes, I n c . v. S h a n e r , 999 467 ( A l a . 2008) for appealing (clarifying and modifying the So. the an a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d u n d e r § 6-6-15). circuit a w a r d as t h e 59 Like as the circuit the aggrieved asking the circuit the procedure t h a t the judgment illustrated Florida, to enter court. party court circuit of court enter the i n Parham v. supra. established not court. grant entered The clerk arbitration Under § 6-6-15, could to circuit by set § the then f i l e aside or American 6-6-15, i t arbitration court. That Bankers a to was award point of I n Parham, A m e r i c a n B a n k e r s s o u g h t r e v i e w of the award as the Insurance was Co. an a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d i n t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t . had the the judgment. Under essential required 71B(f), motion v a c a t e the was judgment of the as u n d e r R u l e Rule court 2d procedure c u r r e n t p r o c e d u r e u n d e r R u l e 7 1 B ( f ) , u n d e r § 6-6-15 t h e of an However, t h e judgment of the clerk circuit c i r c u i t c o u r t l a t e r e n t e r e d an o r d e r p u r p o r t i n g American Bankers' motion 9 to vacate the award. to On 1111375 appeal, this Court vacated d i s m i s s e d the appeal, the circuit court's order and concluding: "We f i n d no i n d i c a t i o n i n t h e r e c o r d t h a t t h e c l e r k of the Shelby C i r c u i t Court entered the a r b i t r a t o r ' s o r d e r as t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h a t c o u r t as r e q u i r e d u n d e r § 6-6-15, A l a . Code 1975; t h u s , t h e r e i s no f i n a l j u d g m e n t f r o m w h i c h Parham can a p p e a l . A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s ... o r d e r [ p u r p o r t i n g t o g r a n t t h e m o t i o n t o v a c a t e t h e award] i s v o i d and i s h e r e b y v a c a t e d , and t h i s a p p e a l i s d i s m i s s e d . See H a r v e y v. C i t y o f O n e o n t a , 715 So. 2d 779, 781 (Ala. 1998) ('A judgment of a court without j u r i s d i c t i o n i s v o i d . An a p p e a l w i l l n o t l i e f r o m a v o i d j u d g m e n t . ' ( c i t i n g , among o t h e r c a s e s , L u k e n v. B a n c B o s t o n M o r t g a g e C o r p . , 580 So. 2d 578 (Ala. 1991)))." Parham, 24 So. 2d 878, 882 circuit 3d a t 1104. ( A l a . 2008) See a l s o J e n k s v. H a r r i s , 990 (stating that, under § c o u r t ' s o r d e r p u r p o r t i n g t o s e t a s i d e an a w a r d was So. 6-6-15, a arbitration v o i d b e c a u s e t h e c i r c u i t c l e r k had n o t f i r s t entered t h e a w a r d as t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e c o u r t ) . Like 6-6-15, court circuit § to Rule first 71B(f) enter judgment of t h a t c o u r t b e f o r e motion to set aside the the the award. requires the clerk of the arbitration award as the circuit c o u r t may In case, this a c t on there is i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e c l e r k e n t e r e d t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d as judgment of the circuit court. Thus, the circuit a no the court's o r d e r p u r p o r t i n g t o deny G u a r d i a n ' s m o t i o n t o v a c a t e o r m o d i f y 10 1111375 the arbitration A c c o r d i n g l y , we We note or modify award vacate is void. Parham and t h e o r d e r and d i s m i s s t h e that, after Guardian filed Jenks. appeal. i t s motion to vacate t h e a r b i t r a t i o n award, w h i c h we have c o n s t r u e d as a n o t i c e of appeal, the U s e l t o n s f i l e d a "motion t o c o n f i r m " the award. I n i t s o r d e r p u r p o r t i n g t o deny G u a r d i a n ' s vacate or modify the award, the c i r c u i t court also motion to purported t o g r a n t t h e U s e l t o n s ' m o t i o n t o c o n f i r m t h e award, p u r p o r t i n g to enter issue." sought entry judgment Although to of award. a invoke a Rule on award " f o r which execution i t i s u n c l e a r , i t appears t h a t the Rule j u d g m e n t by 71C the 71C, A l a . R. filing their Civ. P., motion Useltons i n seeking to confirm provides, i n pertinent part: "(a) Who may enforce. Any party to an arbitration may seek enforcement of the award e n t e r e d as a r e s u l t o f t h e a r b i t r a t i o n . " (b) When f i l e d . I f no a p p e a l has b e e n f i l e d p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 71B w i t h i n t h i r t y (30) d a y s o f service of the n o t i c e of the award, thereby r e s u l t i n g i n a waiver of the r i g h t t o review, the p a r t y s e e k i n g e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e a w a r d may a t any time t h e r e a f t e r seek enforcement of the award i n the a p p r o p r i a t e c i r c u i t c o u r t as s e t f o r t h i n p a r a g r a p h (c) o f t h i s r u l e . " ( c ) Where f i l e d . The m o t i o n f o r e n t r y o f j u d g m e n t s h a l l be f i l e d w i t h the c l e r k of the circuit c o u r t where t h e action underlying the 11 may an the 1111375 a r b i t r a t i o n i s p e n d i n g o r i f no a c t i o n i s p e n d i n g i n the c i r c u i t c o u r t , then i n the o f f i c e of the c l e r k o f t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t o f t h e c o u n t y where t h e a w a r d i s made. " " ( f ) P r o c e d u r e a f t e r f i l i n g . The c l e r k p r o m p t l y s h a l l e n t e r t h e a w a r d as t h e f i n a l j u d g m e n t o f t h e court. A f t e r s e r v i c e p u r s u a n t t o p a r a g r a p h (e) o f t h i s r u l e , t h e p r e v a i l i n g p a r t y may s e e k e x e c u t i o n on t h e j u d g m e n t as i n any o t h e r c a s e . " (Emphasis added.) Rule 71C p r o v i d e s f o r the entry of a judgment on an a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d when an a p p e a l h a s n o t b e e n f i l e d f r o m t h a t a w a r d p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 71B. However, i n t h i s case, Guardian d i d i n i t i a t e an a p p e a l o f t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d u n d e r R u l e 71B by f i l i n g the i n the c i r c u i t award. Thus, R u l e enter a judgment court d i d n o t have court i t s motion t o vacate or modify 71C c o u l d on t h a t award. n o t have b e e n e m p l o y e d t o Accordingly, the a u t h o r i t y to "confirm" the circuit t h e award by e n t e r i n g a j u d g m e n t on t h e award p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 7 1 C . circuit facility court also awarded B e t t e r costs to the Useltons 1 Business Bureau fees The and i n connection with the entry of F u r t h e r m o r e , we n o t e t h a t R u l e 7 1 C ( f ) d i r e c t s t h e c l e r k o f t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t t o e n t e r an a w a r d as t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t , w h i c h was n o t done i n t h i s c a s e . 1 12 1111375 the award; i t follows that the circuit c o s t s as a u t h o r i t y t o a w a r d t h o s e f e e s and In summary, we court well. construe Guardian's motion lacked the to vacate or m o d i f y t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d o f December 21, 2011, as a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l u n d e r R u l e 71B, thus e f f e c t u a t i n g the appeal of the award t o the c i r c u i t c o u r t . circuit c o u r t n e v e r e n t e r e d t h e a w a r d as t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h a t c o u r t , the c i r c u i t to However, b e c a u s e t h e c l e r k o f t h e deny c o u r t ' s o r d e r o f May Guardian's Essentially, motion to vacate 31, 2012, p u r p o r t i n g or modify is Guardian's appeal remains pending i n the court, a w a i t i n g f u r t h e r procedures u n d e r R u l e 71B. void. circuit Further, b e c a u s e G u a r d i a n has a p p e a l e d f r o m t h e a r b i t r a t i o n a w a r d u n d e r R u l e 71B, t h a t a w a r d c o u l d n o t be e n t e r e d as t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e c o u r t u n d e r 71C. Thus, t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t l a c k e d a u t h o r i t y t o e n t e r a j u d g m e n t on t h e a w a r d B e t t e r B u s i n e s s Bureau with the entry c o u r t ' s May of f e e s and that 31, 2012, u n d e r R u l e 71C facility judgment. o r d e r , and we We and t o a w a r d costs i n connection vacate the circuit d i s m i s s the appeal. ORDER VACATED; APPEAL DISMISSED. S t u a r t , B o l i n , P a r k e r , Murdock, Shaw, M a i n , and W i s e , J J . , concur. Moore, C . J . , concurs i n the 13 result.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
