Opinion · Alabama Court Opinions
UNION PLANTERS BANK v. WATSON, 794 So.2d 1094 (Ala. 2001)
Union Planters Bank, N.A. v. Clyde R. Watson, 794 So. 2d 1094 (Ala. 2001)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Alabama Court Opinions
- Jurisdiction
- Alabama
- Date
- 2001-04-06
- Topic
- general
UNION PLANTERS BANK v. WATSON, 794 So.2d 1094 (Ala. 2001) Union Planters Bank, N.A. v. Clyde R. Watson et al. No. 1990244.Supreme Court of Alabama.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed UNION PLANTERS BANK v. WATSON, 794 So.2d 1094 (Ala. 2001). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
UNION PLANTERS BANK v. WATSON,794 So.2d 1094(Ala. 2001)
Union Planters Bank, N.A. v. Clyde R. Watson et al.
No. 1990244.
Supreme Court of Alabama.
Decided April 6, 2001.
Steven L. Nicholas and Steve Olen of Olen Nicholas, P.C., Mobile; and David G. Wirtes and Richard T. Dorman of Cunningham, Bounds, Yance, Crowder Brown, L.L.C., Mobile, for appellees.
On Application for Rehearing
APPLICATION GRANTED; OPINION OF DECEMBER 15, 2000, WITHDRAWN; AFFIRMED WITHOUT OPINION.
Moore, C.J., and Houston, See, Lyons, Johnstone, Harwood, Woodall, and Stuart, JJ., concur.
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1095
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1096
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1097
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1098
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1099
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1100
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1101
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1102
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1103
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1104
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1105
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1106
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1107
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE OPINION ORIGINALLY APPEARING ON THESE PAGES WAS WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE REPUBLISHED TOGETHER WITH THE ORIGINAL OPINION.]Page 1108