Court Opinion

ID: 9934680
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:54:28.638037+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:26:17.833102
License: Public Domain

If I were writing on a clean slate, I would simply hold that the summary judgment was proper because the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the annexation. That would be consistent with the position that I took in joining Justice Almon's dissent on the standing issue in Johnson v. Rice, 551 So.2d 940
(Ala. 1989). However, a majority of this Court impliedly held that the plaintiffs in Johnson v. Rice, supra, had standing.Johnson v. Rice was consolidated with JLJ, Inc. v. MarshallCounty Concerned Citizens, 551 So.2d 940 (Ala. 1989). I cannot distinguish the standing issue in JLJ, Inc. v. Marshall CountyConcerned Citizens from the standing issue in this case. So the slate is not clean. The majority of this Court has held that these plaintiffs have standing, and for me to hold otherwise would violate not only the doctrine of stare decisis, but also the doctrine of res judicata. That I refuse to do. Therefore, I must respectfully dissent.