Ex Parte Sims

15 Citing cases

  1. Cincinnati Ins. Cos. v. Barber Insulation

    946 So. 2d 441 (Ala. 2006)   Cited 22 times
    In Cincinnati Insurance Cos. v. Barber Insulation, Inc., 946 So.2d 441, 449 (Ala. 2006), however, there is no indication that the trial court entered an order, as in this case, compelling compliance and declining to dismiss the action.

    Ala. Code 1975, § 34-3-21 (emphasis added). This section "`govern[s] settlement agreements reached while the case is still at the trial level,'" and Ala. R.App. P. 47 "`govern[s] settlement agreements reached while the matter is on appeal.'" Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380, 382 (Ala. 1993) (quoting Spurlock v. Pioneer Fin. Servs., Inc., 808 F.Supp. 782, 783 (M.D.Ala.1992)). In the absence of compliance with this statute, the alleged agreement is unenforceable as a matter of law.

  2. Comalander v. Spottswood

    846 So. 2d 1086 (Ala. 2002)   Cited 10 times

    However, Comalander and the attorney representing Comalander on his claims against the Spottswoods have both stipulated that they were advised of the settlement agreement and that they consented to the settlement agreement. This Court has held that all settlement agreements entered into by attorneys at the trial level are governed by § 34-3-21, Ala. Code 1975. Holmes v. Sanders, 729 So.2d 314, 316 (Ala. 1999); Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380 (Ala. 1993). Section 34-3-21 provides: "An attorney has authority to bind his client, in any action or proceeding, by any agreement in relation to such case, made in writing, or by an entry to be made on the minutes of the court."

  3. Ex Parte Panell v. Henslee

    756 So. 2d 862 (Ala. 1999)   Cited 29 times
    Holding that the statutory limitations period begins to run from the date of the occurrence of the tortious act or omission

    The judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals is affirmed. See Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380 (Ala. 1993) (Section 34-3-21 governs settlements before appeal, and Ala.R.App.P. 47 governs settlements during the appellate period). OPINION OF AUGUST 6, 1999, WITHDRAWN; OPINION SUBSTITUTED; APPLICATION OVERRULED; AFFIRMED.

  4. Holmes v. Sanders

    729 So. 2d 314 (Ala. 1999)   Cited 11 times

    Compromise and Settlement This Court has held that all settlement agreements entered into by attorneys and occurring at the trial level are governed by § 34-3-21, Ala. Code 1975. Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380 (Ala. 1993). Section 34-3-21 states: "An attorney has authority to bring his client, in any action or proceeding, by any agreement in relation to such case, made in writing, or by an entry to be made on this minutes of the court."

  5. Chapman v. Chapman

    No. CL-2022-0855 (Ala. Civ. App. Jul. 21, 2023)

    See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(F), Ala. R. App. P.; Spradlin v. Spradlin, 601 So.2d 76, 78-79 (Ala. 1992); Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380, 382 (Ala. 1993); Reeves v. Reeves, [Ms. 2200216, Oct. 1, 2021] ___So. 3d ___, ___ (Ala. Civ. App. 2021); Self v. Self, 290 So.3d 431, 437 n. 6 (Ala. Civ. App. 2019); R.B.S. v. K.M.S., 58 So.3d 795, 800 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010); and Belcourt v. Belcourt, 911 So.2d 735, 737 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005).

  6. Hood v. Hood

    72 So. 3d 666 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011)   Cited 9 times

    This court has explained: " ‘ All settlement agreements entered into by attorneys and occurring at the trial-court level are governed by § 34-3-21, Ala.Code 1975. Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380, 382 (Ala.1993). To be effective under § 34-3-21, an agreement must be made in writing or entered in the minutes of the court.

  7. Willis v. Willis

    45 So. 3d 347 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010)   Cited 21 times
    Remanding a case for a new trial because the trial court failed to hold an evidentiary hearing before it determined an award of child support

    This court has explained: "All settlement agreements entered into by attorneys and occurring at the trial-court level are governed by § 34-3-21, Ala. Code 1975. Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380, 382 (Ala. 1993). To be effective under § 34-3-21, an agreement must be made in writing or entered in the minutes of the court.

  8. BFI Waste Services, L.L.C. v. Circle J Roll-Offs, Inc.

    934 So. 2d 1058 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005)

    " Section 34-3-21 is employed to "review the validity of settlement agreements reached in the trial court." Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380, 382 (Ala. 1993). The record indicates that the attorneys for BFI and Circle J did not execute a written settlement agreement.

  9. McIver v. Bondy's Ford, Inc.

    916 So. 2d 616 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005)   Cited 3 times
    Holding that the requirements of § 34-3-21, Ala. Code 1975, had not been satisfied

    "[Section] 34-3-21 specifically governs the enforcement and validity of settlement agreements reached between parties while a case is at trial level, while Rule 47, [Ala.] R.App. P., governs the enforcement and validity of settlement agreements reached while a case is on appeal." Contractor Success Group, Inc. v. Service Thrust Org., Inc., 681 So.2d 212, 215 (Ala.Civ.App. 1996) (citing Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380 (Ala. 1993)). Our Supreme Court addressed the application of § 34-3-21 in a factually similar context in Phillips v. Knight, 559 So.2d 564.

  10. Harris v. Preskitt

    911 So. 2d 8 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005)   Cited 10 times
    Stating that an unserved defendant had never been a party to the action and that the judgment was final as to the served defendants without need for a judgment dismissing the unserved defendant

    Section 34-3-21, Ala. Code 1975, governs the validity and enforcement of settlement agreements reached between parties at the trial-court level. Ex parte Sims, 627 So.2d 380 (Ala. 1993). Section 34-3-21, Ala. Code 1975, provides: `An attorney has authority to bind his client, in any action or proceeding, by any agreement in relation to such case, made in writing, or by an entry to be made on the minutes of the court.' A settlement agreement entered into between the parties is binding and will be summarily enforced.