Appellate Law

Rule 60(b) Motion Is Not A Substitute For An Appeal

In D.L.L. II v. B.J., [Ms. 2070891] (Ala. Civ. App. Nov. 7, 2008), the Court of Civil Appeals reviewed the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion.  First, the Court reversed the denial of a Rule 60(b)(4) motion because the Court had previously held that the order was void for lack of jurisdiction.  However, the Rule 60(b) motion also sought review of another order of the trial court.  The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed that denial.  Because a Rule 60(b) motion is not a substitute for an appeal, it does not bring the underlying judgment up for review.  Rather, the only issues raised on the appeal of the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion is whether the trial court erred in denying the motion.

Full post as published by Alabama Appellate Watch on November 14, 2008 (boomark / email).