Ex parte Renasant Bank, [Ms. SC-2025-0239, Oct. 17, 2025] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2025). The Court (Bryan, J.; Stewart, C.J., and Shaw, Wise, Sellers, Mendheim, Cook, McCool, and Lewis, JJ., concur) denies Renasant Bank’s (“the bank”) mandamus petition seeking a writ directing the Madison Circuit Court to vacate its order canceling a previously scheduled bench trial.
The Court explains that “the bank contends that it has a clear legal right to an order striking the cancellation order and setting the matter for a bench trial because, it contends, Sanchez’s jury-trial waiver is enforceable.” Ms. *6. The Court holds that “[b]ecause the bank’s motion did not ask the circuit court to strike Sanchez’s jury-trial demand, the circuit court’s denial of the bank’s motion was not a refusal to strike the jury-trial demand, which is a necessary requirement for mandamus relief.” Ms. *8, citing Ex parte BancorpSouth Bank, 109 So. 3d 163, 166 (Ala. 2012). The Court further clarifies that “[h]ad the circuit court actually scheduled a jury trial, the bank might have had a clear legal right to an order canceling it, but that is not what happened here. Instead, the circuit court scheduled a status conference.” Ms. *9.