Rule 54(b) Certification Improper

|

Roberson v. Daniel, [Ms. SC-2025-0040, Nov. 26, 2025] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2025). The Court (Bryan, J.; Stewart, C.J., and Shaw, Wise, Sellers, Mendheim, Cook, and McCool, JJ., concur) dismisses Marty and Brenda Roberson’s appeal from an order of the Cullman Circuit Court entered on a jury verdict awarding Teresa Daniel approximately $10 million in damages. Because other claims, counterclaims, and third-party claims were still pending below, the Court holds the circuit court exceeded its discretion in certifying its order as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b), Ala. R. Civ. P.

The Court first reiterates “if a defendant seeks bankruptcy protection during the pendency of an action, a formal Rule 21 severance of a plaintiff’s claims against the debtor defendant from the plaintiff’s claims against any solvent codefendants may be appropriate under certain circumstances… In such situations, it is unnecessary – at least insofar as the severed claims against the debtor defendant are concerned – to certify the resulting judgment concerning the solvent codefendants as final pursuant to Rule 54(b). ... A formal severance pursuant to Rule 21 is also not required… However, in the absence of such a severance, a Rule 54(b) certification is necessary to make a judgment concerning the solvent codefendants sufficiently final to support an appeal.” Ms. **11-12, citing Gaddy v. SE Property Holdings, LLC, 218 So. 3d 315 (Ala. 2016), internal citations omitted.

In rejecting the 54(b) certification, the Court concludes “[n]otwithstanding [Defendant] RI Three’s bankruptcy proceeding, we conclude that, considered altogether, the interrelated nature of Daniel’s adjudicated claims and her unadjudicated claims weighs against the circuit court’s decision to certify its October 15, 2024, order as final pursuant to Rule 54(b).” Ms. * *26-27. The Court reiterates that it looks with “some disfavor” on 54(b) certifications and that “‘[a]ppellate review in a piecemeal fashion is not favored.’” Ms. *36, quoting Schlarb v. Lee, 955 So. 2d 418, 419 (Ala. 2006), some internal quotation marks omitted.

Related Document

Categories: 
Share To: