Court Opinion

ID: 9937019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 19:00:33.503937+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:34:28.877759
License: Public Domain

I respectfully dissent. Injuring Willis's property without compensating him does violate § 23, Alabama Constitution of 1901, which does apply to the UNA, in that injuring the property is taking it to the extent of the injury. When one man has killed another, we say that the killer hastaken the other's life. This ordinary English usage is a good reason why we should not only reverse the summary judgment against Willis but also respect our own precedents of Foreman v. State, 676 So.2d 303 (Ala. 1995), and Barber v. State, 703 So.2d 314 (Ala. 1997), as well as the doctrine of stare decisis.