Case ID: so2d_507/html/1323-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. ADAMS, Justice", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mildred STALLWORTH v. BOARD OF SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS OF MOBILE COUNTY.
    85-512.
    Supreme Court of Alabama.
    May 15, 1987.
    Mercería L. Ludgood, Mobile, for appellant.
    Frank G. Taylor and J. David Jordan, Mobile, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered after a jury verdict in favor of the defendant. We affirm. The appellant does not point to any ruling of the trial court which was adverse to her. Accordingly, she presents nothing for this Court to review. City of Montgomery v. Robinson, 441 So.2d 857 (Ala.1983); Woodham v. Woodham, 387 So.2d 150 (Ala.1980).

AFFIRMED.

TORBERT, C.J., and MADDOX, JONES, ALMON, SHORES, BEATTY, HOUSTON, and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.

ADAMS, J., concurs specially.

ADAMS, Justice

(concurring specially).

Plaintiff raises in this case the issue of whether principles set forth in the recent United States Supreme Court case of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), should be applied in the civil litigation context. Our per curiam affirmance in this case should not be interpreted to denote insensitivity to the issue raised by plaintiff. However, such a substantial legal proposition deserves a well documented record, as well as extensive briefing before this Court. Appellant’s seven-page brief simply does not treat the issue in such a manner that this Court can entertain it.