Ala. Code § 12-21-12

Section 12-21-12’s substantial evidence rule governs whether the evidence is sufficient to support jury findings.

Truck Rentals of Alabama, Inc. v. G.P. Thompson Enters., Inc. · filed 1992-03-20

We have examined the record, in light of the “substantial evidence rule,” Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, and conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support both findings.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact in an action filed after June 11, 1987.

Borden v. Consumer Warehouse Foods, Inc. · filed 1992-07-24

We recognize that Byars was decided under the "scintilla rule." However, we think this is inconsequential. The plaintiff presented substantial evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact with regard to whether Consumer Foods was negligent.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence in an action that was not pending on June 11, 1987.

Davis v. Cotton States Mut. Ins. Co. · filed 1992-08-21

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that Davis meet his burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence when the action was not pending on June 11, 1987.

Howard v. Mutual Sav. Life Ins. Co. · filed 1992-09-04

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard to actions not pending on June 11, 1987; speculation about causation does not satisfy that standard.

Hill v. Hill · filed 1992-10-23

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, the standard of review is the “substantial evidence” rule. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. ... Ms. Hill as plaintiff presented no substantial evidence of causation.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard to cases filed after June 11, 1987.

Irons v. Service Merchandise Co., Inc. · filed 1992-11-25

This case was filed after June 11, 1987; therefore, the applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule. See West v. Founder's Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870 (Ala.1989); see, also, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence rule to summary judgment review of an action filed in June 1991.

Palmer v. Resolution Trust Corp. · filed 1993-02-05

The present action was filed in June 1991; therefore, the applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence rule." See § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence of a disputed fact to defeat summary judgment in an action filed in May 1988.

Burroughs v. JACKSON NAT. INS. CO. · filed 1993-03-26

The present action was filed in May 1988; therefore, the applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence rule." See § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. ... Based upon Burroughs's testimony that he made his own investigation of the policy before he invested his money and based upon the documents he received before he purchased his policy, we hold that Burroughs failed to produce substantial evidence that he justifiably relied upon Curtis's alleged statement that he could get a substantial portion of his investment returned to him at any time after the policy was issued.

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant in an action not pending on June 11, 1987, to meet the substantial evidence standard.

Allen v. Gulf Life Ins. Co. · filed 1993-04-02

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that Allen, the nonmovant, meet her burden by "substantial evidence." Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala. 1989). Under the substantial evidence test the nonmovant must present "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a directed verdict to present evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

K.S. v. Carr · filed 1993-04-02

To satisfy the "substantial evidence test" ( see § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975), the nonmoving party is required to present "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); Rowden v. Tomlinson, 538 So.2d 15, 19 (Ala.1988).

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to sustain a claim for compensatory damages in an action filed after June 11, 1987; the court decides whether the evidence is sufficient.

Phillips Colleges of Alabama v. Lester · filed 1993-04-30

Lester's action was not pending on June 11, 1987; therefore proof by substantial evidence was required in this case to sustain his claim for compensatory damages. Ala. Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Nall v. Reinhardt Motors, Inc. · filed 1993-07-30

Substantial evidence is “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.”

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to create a fact issue sufficient to defeat a motion for a directed verdict or JNOV.

Lozier Corp. v. Gray · filed 1993-08-20(d)

Because this action was commenced after June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, applies; that section requires proof by "substantial evidence" to create an issue of fact and thereby defeat a motion for a directed verdict or for a JNOV. "Substantial evidence" is "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." ... We conclude that Gray presented substantial evidence in support of her claim.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard to compensatory damages claims in cases that were not pending on June 11, 1987.

Baker v. Pi Kappa Phi Fraternity · filed 1993-08-27

Because this case was not pending on June 11, 1987, the applicable standard for reviewing Baker's claim for compensatory damages is the "substantial evidence" rule. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. ... The evidence, when viewed favorably toward Baker, was sufficient under both the "substantial evidence" and the "clear and convincing evidence" standards of review to allow a jury to determine whether the ranking members of Pi Kappa Phi used Anlage as a means of "crowd control" during parties and whether they expected him to use physical force to accomplish his job.

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant to present substantial evidence: evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact at issue.

Gabrielson v. Healthcorp of Eufaula, Inc. · filed 1993-08-27(d)

Because this action was filed after June 11, 1987, the nonmovant must meet this burden by "substantial evidence." Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989). Under the substantial evidence test, the nonmovant must present "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); § 12-21-12(d).

Substantial evidence is evidence from which fair-minded people exercising impartial judgment can reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

McGinnis v. Continental Insurance Co. · filed 1993-09-03(d)

“Substantial evidence” is “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.”

Section 12-21-12 supplies the substantial evidence standard for reviewing the sufficiency of evidence supporting compensatory damages in cases not pending on June 11, 1987.

Big B, Inc. v. Cottingham · filed 1993-09-10

Because this case was not pending on June 11, 1987, the applicable standard for reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence on Cottingham's compensatory damages claim is the "substantial evidence" rule. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12(d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people exercising impartial judgment can reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Hipps v. Lauderdale County Bd. of Educ. · filed 1993-09-24(d)

Substantial evidence is "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see also Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d).

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to submit an issue of fact to the trier of facts.

Herring v. Parkman · filed 1994-01-28

Section 12-21-12, Ala. Code 1975, requires proof by "substantial evidence" in order to "submit an issue of fact to the trier of facts."

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence from which fair-minded persons could reasonably infer the fact a party seeks to prove.

Christian v. Kenneth Chandler Const. Co. · filed 1995-03-03

"Substantial evidence" is "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. ... Even viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiffs, as nonmovants on the motions for summary judgment, we conclude that they did not meet their burden of presenting substantial evidence of wantonness.

Section 12-21-12(d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people exercising impartial judgment can reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Jewell v. Seaboard Indus., Inc. · filed 1995-06-09(d)

We review a summary judgment by the "substantial evidence" rule. Under this rule, once the movant has made a prima facie showing that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law, the nonmovant must rebut this showing by presenting "substantial evidence" creating a genuine issue of material fact. "Substantial evidence" has been defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870 (Ala. 1989); Henson v. Celtic Life Ins. Co., 621 So.2d 1268 (Ala.1993); Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d).

Substantial evidence has enough weight and quality for fair-minded people to reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Owens v. Food World, Inc. · filed 1995-08-11(d)

The standard of review applicable to a motion for a directed verdict is the substantial evidence rule. ... See § 12-21-12(d), Ala.Code 1975. “Substantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.”

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to establish a genuine issue of fact; evidence is substantial when fair-minded persons could reasonably infer the fact sought to be proved.

Duckett v. WILSON HOTEL MGMT. CO., INC. · filed 1995-11-17

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. "Substantial evidence" is defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989). ... We believe that this conflict is sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact, thus precluding a summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12(d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people exercising impartial judgment can reasonably infer the fact sought to be proved.

Hughes v. Hertz Corp. · filed 1995-11-17(d)

We review a summary judgment by the "substantial evidence" rule. Under this rule, once the movant has made a prima facie showing that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law, the nonmovant must rebut this showing by presenting "substantial evidence" creating a genuine issue of material fact. "Substantial evidence" has been defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870 (Ala. 1989); Henson v. Celtic Life Ins. Co., 621 So.2d 1268 (Ala.1993); Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d).

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to establish a genuine issue of material fact and avoid summary judgment.

Calhoun v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co. · filed 1996-04-05

The applicable standard of review is the “substantial evidence” rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. ... After reviewing the record, we conclude that Calhoun did not present substantial evidence that Escambia had any control over Turner or over the manner in which he ran Jinright-Turner.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to defeat summary judgment: evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Edwards v. Kroger Co. · filed 1996-04-26

The applicable standard of review is the “substantial evidence” rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. “Substantial evidence” is defined as “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.” ... Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovants, the Edwardses, we conclude that they presented substantial evidence that a Kroger employee created the hazardous condition; thus, the Edwardses eliminated the necessity of proving Kroger had notice of the condition.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard: evidence must allow fair-minded people to reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Barlow v. Piggly Wiggly Dixieland, Inc. · filed 1996-05-10

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. "Substantial evidence" is defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." ... In light of the foregoing, we conclude that Barlow presented substantial evidence that he was constructively discharged for seeking workers' compensation benefits and that the reasons proffered by Piggly Wiggly for the termination were pretextual, even though when Barlow resigned he was working a consistent schedule and had reached a settlement of his workers' compensation claim.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard to summary judgment review; evidence is substantial when fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

O'BARR v. Oberlander · filed 1996-05-31

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. "Substantial evidence" is defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12(d) requires substantial evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact a party must prove before the issue goes to a jury.

Consolidated Stores, Inc. v. Gargis · filed 1996-05-31(d)

We must determine whether the party with the burden of proof presented sufficient evidence to require a jury determination of the issue. Id. at 726. We are governed by the "substantial evidence" rule set forth in Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d). "[S]ubstantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to present substantial evidence supporting each element of a claim to withstand a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

General Motors Corp. v. Bell · filed 1996-09-20

For actions filed after June 11, 1987, the standard of review applicable to motions for a directed verdict and for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict is the "substantial evidence rule." See Ala. Code 1975, § 12-21-12. Thus, in an action filed after June 11, 1987, a nonmovant must present substantial evidence supporting each element of his cause of action to withstand a movant's motion for a directed verdict or for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence supporting each element of a claim or defense to withstand a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

City of Geneva v. Yarbrough · filed 1996-11-01

To withstand a motion for a directed verdict or a motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the nonmovant must present “substantial evidence” supporting each element of his cause of action or defense. “Substantial evidence” is “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.” West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to meet its burden with substantial evidence.

Bramlett v. Adamson Ford, Inc. · filed 1996-12-20

Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12 mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 replaces the scintilla rule with the higher substantial evidence standard for cases filed after June 11, 1987.

Finley v. Patterson · filed 1997-06-13

We note that in Nail, 542 So.2d at 1211, we held, applying the "scintilla rule" of evidence, that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find an imminent probability of harm. Alabama has since abandoned the scintilla rule in favor of the significantly higher standard of "substantial evidence." See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Brown v. Gamble, 537 So.2d 476, 477 (Ala.1989) (stating that cases filed after June 11, 1987, are subject to the substantial evidence rule instead of the scintilla rule).

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence: evidence from which fair-minded people can reasonably infer the fact sought to be proved.

Hunter v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. · filed 1997-08-08

The applicable standard of review is the “substantial evidence” rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. “Substantial evidence” is defined as “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.”

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact the party seeks to prove.

McLeod v. Life of the South Ins. Co. · filed 1997-08-29

The nonmovant must meet his burden by presenting "substantial evidence." Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989); Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. "Under the substantial evidence test, the nonmovant must present `evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.'" Howard, 608 So.2d at 381 (quoting West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala. 1989)).

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard when deciding whether a factual dispute precludes summary judgment.

Craig v. Forest Institute of Professional Psychology · filed 1997-10-17

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule. § 12-21-12, Ala. Code 1975. "Substantial evidence" is defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Substantial evidence is evidence from which reasonable and fair-minded people could reach different conclusions about a fact, allowing the issue to go to the jury.

City of Gadsden v. Lawder · filed 1997-10-31(d)

Substantial evidence is defined as “evidence of such quality and weight that reasonable and fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment might reach different conclusions as to the existence of the fact sought to be proven.” § 12-21-12(d), Ala.Code 1975. ... Lawder offered evidence from which reasonable and fair-minded persons might reach different conclusions as to the lack of probable cause.

Section 12-21-12 supplies the substantial evidence standard for reviewing a summary judgment.

Bailey v. Walker Regional Medical Center · filed 1997-12-19

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. "Substantial evidence" is defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard when deciding whether the evidence creates a genuine issue of material fact.

Cochran v. Pated · filed 1998-01-30

The applicable standard of review is the. “substantial evidence” rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. “Substantial evidence” is defined as “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.”

Section 12-21-12 requires a summary judgment nonmovant in an action not pending on June 11, 1987, to meet its burden with substantial evidence.

Ex Parte Brislin · filed 1998-02-13

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovants meet their burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 replaces the scintilla rule with the higher substantial evidence standard.

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Washington · filed 1998-03-13

Since Purcell, Alabama has abandoned the scintilla rule in favor of the significantly higher evidentiary standard embodied in the "substantial evidence" rule. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Brown v. Gamble, 537 So.2d 476, 477 (Ala.1989) (stating that cases filed after June 11, 1987, are subject to the substantial evidence rule instead of the scintilla rule).

Section 12-21-12(a) requires substantial evidence to submit a factual question to the jury.

Shoney's, Inc. v. Barnett · filed 1999-04-30(a)

... In ruling on a motion for [a judgment as a matter of law], the trial court is called upon to determine whether the evidence was sufficient to submit a question of fact to the jury; for the court to determine that it was, there must have been `substantial evidence' before the jury to create a question of fact. See, § 12-21-12(a), Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-21-12 supplies the substantial evidence standard for reviewing a summary judgment; substantial evidence permits fair-minded persons to reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Auto-Owners Ins. v. American Cent. Ins. · filed 1999-06-25

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. "Substantial evidence" is defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant to present substantial evidence to withstand a motion for judgment as a matter of law.

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Slade · filed 1999-08-27

The nonmovant must present substantial evidence to withstand a motion for JML. See § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975; West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Subsection (d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people can reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Evans v. Cotton · filed 2000-02-18(d)

“Substantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.” ... Inmate Evans produced no evidence in response to the correctional officers’ motion for a summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12(d)'s substantial evidence standard permits a wantonness claim to go to the jury when the evidence reasonably supports an inference of the defendant's knowledge.

Hobart Corp. v. Scoggins · filed 2000-05-26(d)

"Substantial evidence" has been defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d). ... There was substantial evidence from which the jury could have concluded that Hobart knew of this propensity at the time it sold the saw that injured Scoggins.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence rather than a scintilla to withstand a motion for judgment as a matter of law.

Ex Parte Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. · filed 2001-05-04

First, Maddox was decided under the less stringent "scintilla rule." Here, "substantial" evidence is required. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Speer, 599 So.2d at 1143.

Section 12-21-12(d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people can reasonably infer the fact at issue; conflicting evidence about damages can satisfy that standard and preclude summary judgment.

Weaver v. New Holland Credit Company · filed 2001-09-14(d)

“Substantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.” West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d). ... We conclude that a genuine issue of material fact remains as to the amount Weaver owes on the lease, that is, an issue of fact remains as to the amount of New Holland’s damages.

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant to present substantial evidence to withstand a motion for judgment as a matter of law.

National Insurance Association v. Sockwell · filed 2002-03-15

The nonmovant must present substantial evidence to withstand a motion for [a judgment as a matter of law]. See § 12-21-12, Ala. Code 1975; West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 replaces the scintilla rule with a substantial evidence standard.

Moncrief v. Donohoe · filed 2003-05-02

After Purcell was decided, the Legislature abrogated the scintilla rule in favor of the evidentiary standard embodied in the "substantial evidence" rule. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Brown v. Gamble, 537 So.2d 476, 477 (Ala.1989)(stating that cases filed after June 11, 1987, are subject to the substantial evidence rule instead of the scintilla rule); and West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

A fact issue requires substantial evidence from which fair-minded persons could reasonably infer the fact sought to be proved.

Hunt Petroleum Corp. v. State · filed 2004-04-30

"Substantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989). See also § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975; Thomas v. Principal Fin. Group, 566 So.2d 735, 738 (Ala.1990). ... The State has failed to meet its burden of proving by substantial evidence that the State relied on Hunt's alleged misrepresentations.

Subsection (d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people can reasonably infer the fact at issue.

Hunt v. NationsCredit Fin. Servs. Corp. · filed 2004-12-03(d)

"[S]ubstantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d).

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant to present substantial evidence to withstand a motion for judgment as a matter of law.

Lucy-Dawson v. Boyd-Hadley · filed 2006-07-28

The nonmovant must present `substantial evidence' in order to withstand a motion for a JML. See § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975; West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989). ... Although the foregoing testimony in favor of the client was disputed, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the client, and entertaining such reasonable inferences as the jury would have been free to draw from the evidence, we conclude that the evidence at trial was sufficient to support the jury's damages award to the client.

Subsection (d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people can reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

McDonald v. Lighami Development Co., LLC · filed 2006-12-08(d)

"[S]ubstantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Fla., 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d).

Subsection (d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people can reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Evans v. First National Bank of Jasper · filed 2008-11-14(d)

“[S]ubstantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.” West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see § 12-21-12(d), Ala.Code 1975. ... Accordingly, because there were genuine issues of material fact, we conclude that the circuit court erred by entering a summary judgment in favor of the Bank.

Section 12-21-12(d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people can reasonably infer the fact sought to be proved.

Laster Ex Rel. Laster v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. · filed 2009-01-16(d)

Evidence is "substantial" if it is of "such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); § 12-21-12(d), Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-21-12(d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact at issue.

Bill Salter Advtg. v. City of Atmore, 2090639 (ala.civ.app. 10-22-2010) · filed 2010-10-22(d)

“[Substantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.” West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d). ... The BSA plaintiffs have failed to present substantial evidence of damages flowing from Nix’s alleged intentional interference with their business relationships.

Section 12-21-12 supplies the substantial-evidence standard used with Rule 56 for actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Tidmore v. Citizens Bank & Trust · filed 2017-05-12

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the 'substantial evidence rule' ( § 12-21-12, Ala. Code 1975 ), for actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Section 12-21-12 allows a factual issue to be submitted to the fact-finder when substantial evidence supports it.

Rozell v. Childers · filed 2004-02-27(a), (d)

To the extent that the Childerses' argument challenges the sufficiency of Rozell's evidence, we conclude to the contrary; in our view, Rozell adduced substantial evidence, through his testimony and his wife's testimony, from which the trial court could properly have found, under § 12-21-12(a) and § 12-21-12(d), Ala.Code 1975, that he lent $12,000 to the Childerses and that the Childerses agreed to repay that sum, plus interest, over a 48-month period in monthly installments.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact.

Walker v. North American Savings Bank · filed 2013-03-08

To defeat a properly supported summary judgment motion, the nonmoving party must present ‘substantial evidence’ creating a genuine issue of material fact — ‘evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.’ Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to produce substantial evidence of a genuine factual dispute after the movant makes a prima facie showing; speculation about a higher settlement does not suffice.

Hand v. Howell, Sarto & Howell · filed 2013-05-31

Once the movant makes a prima facie showing that there is no genuine issue of material fact, the burden then shifts to the nonmovant to produce ‘substantial evidence’ as to the existence of a genuine issue of material fact. ... Because there is no evidence indicating, but only speculation, that Hand would have been able to settle his injury claim for a higher amount if Roberts and the Howell firm had also named the Montgomery Advertiser as a defendant, that judgment is hereby affirmed.

Section 12-21-12(d) defines substantial evidence as evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Hatch v. NTW INC. · filed 2009-06-19(d)

“[S]ubstantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.” ... Hatch has failed to present substantial evidence indicating that NTW’s decision to discharge him was motivated solely by his filing a workers’ compensation claim.

Section 12-21-12 supplies the substantial evidence standard for summary judgment: the evidence must allow fair-minded people to reasonably infer the fact at issue.

Smith v. Smith · filed 2009-06-19

The applicable standard of review is the ‘substantial evidence’ rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. ‘Substantial evidence’ is defined as ‘evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.’ ... Based on the foregoing standard of review, we hold that the trial court did not err in entering a summary judgment in favor of the former husband.

Section 12-21-12(d) requires substantial evidence to establish a factual issue at summary judgment; conjecture about a store’s knowledge of a hazard is insufficient.

Hale v. KROGER LTD. PARTNERSHIP I · filed 2009-07-02(d)

Hale bore the burden of presenting “substantial evidence” indicating that Kroger actually knew of the spill before he slipped and fell. Hale’s mere belief that Kroger actually knew of the spill, based solely on the naked statement of the Kroger employee that “we’ve called the mop squad” and without any other supporting direct or circumstantial evidence, does not constitute sufficient evidence to withstand Kroger’s motion for a summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12(a) requires substantial evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact on summary judgment.

Silbernagel Ex Rel. Silbernagel v. Maranatha Baptist Church, Inc. · filed 2009-09-11(a)

`In determining whether the nonmovant has created a genuine issue of material fact, we apply the "substantial-evidence rule"—evidence, to create a genuine issue of material fact, must be "substantial." § 12-21-12(a), Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-21-12(d) requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence of a genuine issue of material fact once the movant makes a prima facie showing.

Spriggs v. Compass Bank · filed 1999-04-02(d)

When the movant makes a prima facie showing that those two conditions are satisfied, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to present “substantial evidence” creating a genuine issue of material fact. Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989); § 12-21-12(d) Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact.

Kindred v. Burlington Northern Railroad Co. · filed 1999-05-14

The nonmovant must meet this burden by "substantial evidence," i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see Ala. Code 1975, § 12-21-12. ... Kindred presented sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether he filed the complaint in this action within three years of the accrual of his claim.

A party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion must present substantial evidence in support of the case.

Foley v. Taylor · filed 1997-04-04(d)

Once the moving party has made a properly supported motion for a summary judgment indicating that no genuine issue of material fact exists, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to present "substantial evidence" in support of his case.

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact the plaintiff seeks to prove.

Rhodes v. COLLATERAL MORTG., LTD. · filed 1997-05-02

We note that Rule 56 is to be read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule" (§ 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975). Hurst v. Alabama Power Co., 675 So.2d 397, 398 (Ala. 1996). In order to defeat a defendant's properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present "substantial evidence," i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." Id. (quoting West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989)).

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to present substantial evidence of a genuine issue of material fact to defeat summary judgment.

Ex Parte Mountain Top Indoor Flea Market · filed 1997-05-02

This action was filed after June 11, 1987; therefore, the nonmovant must meet the burden of establishing the existence of a genuine issue of material fact by substantial evidence. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, supra.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence from which a reasonable jury could infer the fact the party seeks to prove.

Turner v. Century 21 Reeves Realty, Inc. · filed 1997-05-09

Pursuant to Ala.Code 1975 § 12-21-12, the Turners, to defeat a properly süpported summary judgment motion, must present substantial evidence, i.e., “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.” West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard to summary judgment review; evidence is substantial when fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact it is offered to prove.

Turner v. Hayes · filed 1997-05-23

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule. § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. "Substantial evidence" is defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence from which a reasonable person could infer the fact to be proved.

ATTYS. INS. v. Smith, Blocker & Lowther, PC · filed 1997-07-03

Rule 56 must be read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala. Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. ... In order to defeat a defendant's properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact to defeat summary judgment.

Provo v. Continental Eagle Corp. · filed 1994-11-10

Rule 56(c), Ala.R.Civ.P., provides that a summary judgment is proper when the movant makes a prima facie showing that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law, unless the nonmovant rebuts that showing by substantial evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact. See § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975; Cain v. Sheraton Perimeter Park S. Hotel, 592 So.2d 218, 219-20 (Ala.1991). ... We conclude that Provo proffered substantial evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the reasons offered by CEC and Fiddler for his termination were a pretext for an impermissible termination.

Section 12-21-12 abolished the scintilla rule and requires substantial evidence when a court decides a motion for summary judgment.

Ross v. Edwards · filed 1989-03-31

The "scintilla rule" was abolished on June 11, 1987, see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, which was prior to the filing of this action by the Edwardses. Proof by "substantial evidence" is now the test when passing on a motion for summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12 replaces the scintilla rule with a substantial-evidence standard for summary judgment in cases filed after June 11, 1987.

Vardaman v. Florence City Bd. of Educ. · filed 1989-04-28

We should note at this point that the "scintilla rule" was made inapplicable to cases filed after June 11, 1987, see Ala. Code 1975, § 12-21-12; this action was filed after that date. Proof by "substantial evidence" is now the test when passing on a motion for summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence of a genuine dispute of material fact to defeat a supported motion for summary judgment.

Posey v. Posey · filed 1989-05-19

It is not the correct standard for summary judgment, however; the correct standard is whether, in opposition to a prima facie showing to support the defendants' summary judgment motion, Walter Sr. has produced substantial evidence to show that a genuine issue as to a material fact exists so that Walter Jr. and Mary Ann are not entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56, Ala.R.Civ.P.; Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to withstand summary judgment and submit a claim to the jury.

Faulk v. Green Tree Acceptance, Inc. · filed 1989-07-28

With regard to Faulk's counterclaim for repairs performed on the mobile home, we note that the standard of review applicable to a summary judgment motion is now whether "substantial evidence" was offered to warrant submitting the case to the jury. See § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, which was in effect when this summary judgment was entered. Faulk neither submitted the charges for repairs allegedly made, nor offered a list of the alleged repairs themselves. His statement from his affidavit, quoted above, simply does not constitute "substantial evidence" to withstand Green Tree's motion for summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence of every element of a claim to avoid summary judgment when no undisputed defense applies.

Robichaux v. AFBIC Development Co. · filed 1989-09-01

If there is substantial evidence of every element of a cause of action, summary judgment is inappropriate in the absence of some factually undisputed defense. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Perry v. Hancock Fabrics, Inc., 541 So.2d 521 (Ala.1989). ... Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Robichauxs, however, in view of the rights obtained by AFBIC by virtue of the easement, we do not find substantial evidence that AFBIC unlawfully interfered with the Robichaux property.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard when deciding whether a claim can survive summary judgment.

Hanners v. Balfour Guthrie, Inc. · filed 1990-04-20

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence rule." Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Greene v. Thompson, 554 So.2d 376 (Ala.1989); Perry v. Hancock Fabrics, Inc., 541 So.2d 521 (Ala.1989); see, also, Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794 (Ala.1989). ... Rather, the record here clearly reveals that there was substantial evidence of every element of Hanners's cause of action for fraud predicated on a promise to perform some act in the future.

Section 12-21-12 requires the substantial evidence standard to be applied with Rule 56 in actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Cuevas v. W.E. Walker, Inc. · filed 1990-06-08

Rule 56 was read in conjunction with the "scintilla rule of evidence" in actions commenced on or before June 11, 1987; it is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule" for actions filed after that date. See § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975; Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala. 1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present evidence from which fair minded people could reasonably infer the facts to be proved.

Avery v. Geneva County · filed 1990-07-06

We note that this case was filed after June 11, 1987, and is therefore subject to the "substantial evidence" rule. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. Therefore, in order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present evidence of such quality and weight that fair minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the facts sought to be proved.

Section 12-21-12's substantial evidence rule applies to summary judgment rulings in a case filed on July 15, 1988.

Badners v. Prudential Life Ins. Co. · filed 1990-08-03

This case was filed on July 15, 1988. Accordingly, the "substantial evidence rule" applies to the rulings on the motions for summary judgment. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard to summary judgment motions in cases filed after June 11, 1987.

Vance v. Huff · filed 1990-08-31

At the outset, we note that the Vances' complaint was filed after June 11, 1987, the effective date of Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. Therefore, the standard of review on the motions for summary judgment was the "substantial evidence rule."

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment in a case filed after June 11, 1987, to present substantial evidence once the moving party shows no genuine issue of material fact.

Betts v. McDonald's Corp. · filed 1990-08-31

To withstand a motion for summary judgment, once the movant makes a prima facie showing that there is no genuine issue of material fact, the non-movant must (in cases filed after June 11, 1987) show that there is "substantial evidence" in support of his position. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12’s substantial evidence rule applies alongside Rule 56 in actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Graham v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States · filed 1990-09-21

In the present case Rule 56 must be read in conjunction with the “substantial evidence rule,” § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, because this action was filed after June 11, 1987.

Section 12-21-12(d) requires substantial evidence of a genuine issue of material fact to defeat summary judgment in an action filed after June 11, 1987.

Smith v. Arrow Transp. Co., Inc. · filed 1990-09-07(d)

Because Betty's complaint was filed after June 11, 1987, she must have produced "substantial evidence" that showed the existence of a genuine issue of material fact in order to defeat Arrow's motion for summary judgment. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d); Posey v. Posey, 545 So.2d 1329 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to offer substantial evidence.

Kenney v. Kroger Co. · filed 1990-09-21

Because this action was filed after June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by offering "substantial evidence."

A party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion must offer substantial evidence showing a genuine issue of material fact.

Specialty Container Manufacturing, Inc. v. Rusken Packaging, Inc. · filed 1990-11-02

Specialty filed its action on June 9, 1988, and, accordingly, in order to defeat a properly supported summary judgment motion, it must offer substantial evidence to show a genuine issue of material fact. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Home Bank of Guntersville v. Perpetual Federal Savings & Loan Association, 547 So.2d 840 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to defeat a properly supported summary judgment motion in an action filed after June 11, 1987.

Lolley v. Charter Woods Hosp., Inc. · filed 1990-11-30

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule" (§ 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975) in regard to actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. South-Trust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, a party must present "substantial evidence," i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

For actions filed after June 11, 1987, a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion must present substantial evidence from which reasonable people could infer the fact to be proved.

Evans v. National Microsystems, Inc. · filed 1991-02-15

Rule 56 is to be read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule" (§ 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975) for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present "substantial evidence," i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

For cases filed after June 11, 1987, § 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence once the movant shows that no genuine issue of material fact exists.

Weaver v. Frazer · filed 1991-02-15

This case was filed after June 11, 1987; accordingly, the “substantial evidence rule” applies to the ruling on the motion for summary judgment. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. “Once a movant makes a prima facie showing that there is no genuine issue of material fact, the nonmov-ant must show that there is ‘substantial evidence’ in support of his position in order to withstand a motion for summary judgment.”

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence once the moving party has met its burden.

Sommerville v. Tuscaloosa City Board of Education · filed 1991-02-15

Once the moving party has met its burden, the non-moving party must come forward with substantial evidence to show otherwise.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to provide substantial evidence once the moving party shows that no genuine issue of material fact exists.

Worthington v. Palughi · filed 1991-03-01

Once the moving party has made a prima facie showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists, then the burden shifts to the nonmovant to provide "substantial evidence" in support of his position. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Rule 56 A.R.Civ.P.; Hanners v. Balfour Guthrie, Inc., 564 So.2d 412 (Ala.1990); Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence rule to summary judgment motions in cases filed after July 11, 1987.

Hornbuckle v. Berry · filed 1991-03-01

This case was filed after July 11, 1987; accordingly, the “substantial evidence rule” applies to the motion for summary judgment. See § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. ... Based on the foregoing, we find that Hornbuckle has failed to provide substantial evidence to rebut Berry’s prima facie showing that he did not initiate the action resulting in Hornbuckle’s second and third arrests.

Section 12-21-12 makes substantial evidence the test for summary judgment in actions filed after its adoption.

Robinson v. Fluor-Daniel International Corp. · filed 1991-03-15

Since this action was filed after the adoption of Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, proof by substantial evidence is the test for summary judgment.

For actions filed after June 11, 1987, a party opposing summary judgment must present substantial evidence of a genuine issue of material fact.

Peoples v. Town of Ragland · filed 1991-04-05

Because this action was filed after June 11, 1987, the nonmovant must meet his burden by showing "substantial evidence" to indicate a genuine issue of material fact. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Bass v. Southtrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989).

On summary judgment, once the moving party shows that no genuine issue of material fact exists, the nonmoving party must provide substantial evidence showing a question of fact.

Allen v. Storie · filed 1991-04-05

Once the moving party has made a prima facie showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists, the burden of proof shifts to the nonmovant to provide "substantial evidence" in support of his position, so as to show that there is a question of fact. Rule 56(c); Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Hanners v. Balfour Guthrie, Inc., 564 So.2d 412 (Ala.1990); Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794 (Ala.1989). ... Thus, construing the evidence in the light most favorable to Allen, we do not find substantial evidence to rebut Storie's prima facie showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists.

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence of a material fact in actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Gollotte v. Peterbilt of Mobile, Inc. · filed 1991-04-19

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. South-Trust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co., 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence supporting the claim in cases filed after June 11, 1987.

Livingston v. Auto Owners Ins. Co. · filed 1991-04-19

This standard is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence" rule in Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, for cases filed after June 11, 1987. Section 12-21-12 provides that in order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment a party must present substantial evidence in support of his claim.

Section 12-21-12 requires a summary judgment nonmovant in an action not pending on June 11, 1987, to present substantial evidence of a genuine issue of material fact.

Crockett v. Great-West Life Assur. Co. · filed 1991-04-26

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a supported summary judgment motion to produce substantial evidence; allegations and speculation do not suffice.

Young v. Serra Volkswagen, Inc. · filed 1991-05-03

Once the moving party has made a prima facie showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to provide "substantial evidence" in support of his position. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12; Rule 56, A.R.Civ.P.; Hanners v. Balfour Guthrie, Inc., 564 So.2d 412 (Ala.1990); Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794 (Ala.1989). ... Therefore, based on the record before us, we conclude that Serra Volkswagen made the required prima facie showing to support its summary judgment motion and that Young failed to rebut it with substantial evidence supporting her claims of fraud, deceit, malicious misrepresentation, and wantonness.

Section 12-21-12 makes substantial evidence the test for summary judgment in actions filed after its adoption.

Uphaus v. Charter Hosp. of Mobile · filed 1991-05-17

Since this action was filed after the adoption of Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, proof by substantial evidence is the test when passing on a motion for summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence in actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Baxter v. SouthTrust Bank of Dothan · filed 1991-05-31

Rule 56 is to be read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule" for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989). Therefore, in order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, Baxter must present "substantial evidence" that SouthTrust committed conversion.

For actions filed after June 11, 1987, a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion must present substantial evidence.

Moore v. Liberty Nat. Life Ins. Co. · filed 1991-05-31

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. South-Trust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the nonmovant must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fairminded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co., 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12(d) requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

Hamilton v. Plantation Transport, Inc. · filed 1991-06-07(d)

In order to preclude summary judgment on a properly supported motion, the nonmoving party must come forward with “substantial evidence,” that is, “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.”

Section 12-21-12 supplies the substantial evidence standard used with Rule 56 in actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Cook v. Trinity Universal of Kansas · filed 1991-06-07

Rule 56 is to be read in conjunction with the “substantial evidence rule” (§ 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975) for actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Once a summary judgment movant shows no genuine issue of material fact, the nonmovant must provide substantial evidence supporting its position.

McGuire v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. · filed 1991-06-14

Once the moving party has made a prima facie showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to provide “substantial evidence” in support of his position.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to defeat a summary judgment motion.

Pomerantz v. Green · filed 1991-06-21

In determining whether there was substantial evidence to defeat a summary judgment motion (see § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975; West v. Founders Life Assurance Co., 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989)), this Court reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant and resolves all reasonable doubts against the movant. ... Our review of the record and our discussion in this opinion of the evidence indicate that the plaintiffs countered the defendants’ showing on the summary judgment motion with substantial evidence in support of each claim and, even assuming that the defendants made a prima facie showing that there were no genuine issues of material fact, we conclude that the plaintiffs’ evidence in opposition shows that there are genuine issues of material fact for a jury to determine.

For cases filed after June 11, 1987, the substantial evidence rule applies to summary judgment motions.

Dardess v. Blasingame · filed 1991-06-28

[1] This case was filed after June 11, 1987. Accordingly, the "substantial evidence rule" applies to the ruling on the motion for summary judgment. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to meet its burden with substantial evidence.

Wright v. Mills · filed 1991-08-02

Because this action was filed after June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to offer substantial evidence.

Underwood v. SOUTH CENT. BELL TELEPHONE · filed 1991-08-02

Because this action was filed after June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by offering "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment in an action not pending on June 11, 1987, to present substantial evidence of a genuine factual dispute.

M.R.V. Enterprises, Inc. v. Mariott Family Restaurants, Inc. · filed 1991-08-02

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by ‘substantial evidence.’ ... Upon our review of the evidence submitted by M.R.V. and Patel, we find that they have failed to present substantial evidence of any unreasonableness on the part of Marriott.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to support a factual dispute that defeats summary judgment.

Lucas v. Hodges · filed 1991-08-09

Thus, the record contains substantial evidence (see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12) in support of the Lucases’ contention that the defendants suppressed the fact of the damage, and the summary judgment was not proper on that claim.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to support its position with substantial evidence.

Brigman v. Dejute · filed 1991-08-23

Because this action was filed after June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovants meet their burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to present substantial evidence.

Butler v. Aetna Finance Co. · filed 1991-08-30

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794 (Ala.1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fairminded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co., 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires proof by substantial evidence when deciding a motion for summary judgment in an action filed after its adoption.

White v. Allen · filed 1991-09-20

Since this action was filed after the adoption of Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, proof by substantial evidence is now the test when passing on a motion for summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12’s substantial evidence rule applies to summary judgment motions in cases filed after June 11, 1987.

Vise v. Cole Sanitation, Inc. · filed 1991-11-01

This case was filed after June 11, 1987. Accordingly, the "substantial evidence rule” applies to the ruling on the motion for summary judgment. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment; clear and convincing proof is not required.

Spivey v. Southeastern Car & Truck Rentals, Inc. · filed 1991-12-06

The standard of proof necessary to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment is not "clear and convincing” proof but, rather, "substantial evidence.” See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence from which reasonable people could infer the fact the party seeks to prove.

Bean v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. · filed 1991-08-23(d)

Under the substantial evidence test, the nonmovants must present "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12(d).

Section 12-21-12 requires plaintiffs to support their claims with substantial evidence; on summary judgment, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmovant.

Lampton v. Allstate Insurance Co. · filed 1991-08-23

The plaintiffs must prove their case by substantial evidence, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. In determining whether there is substantial evidence, we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant and resolve all reasonable doubts against the movant.

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff to support her claims with substantial evidence to withstand summary judgment.

Stone v. SOUTHLAND NAT. INS. CORP. · filed 1991-10-18

Stone must prove her case by substantial evidence. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. ... Accordingly, Stone did not present substantial evidence of her wantonness claim, and as to that claim the judgment is due to be affirmed.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to show a genuine issue of material fact with substantial evidence.

Bloodsworth v. Morgan · filed 1991-11-01

In order to rebut the prima facie showing made by the defendant, the plaintiffs must show the existence of a genuine issue of material fact by "substantial evidence," Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, which has been defined as "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

When a summary judgment motion is properly supported, the nonmovant must produce substantial evidence that summary judgment is improper.

Dalton v. University of Alabama in Huntsville · filed 1991-11-22

A motion made and supported as provided in the rule shifts the burden to the non-movant, who must produce substantial evidence supporting its position that summary judgment is improper.

Section 12-21-12 requires a summary judgment nonmovant to present substantial evidence when the action was not pending on June 11, 1987.

Union Bank & Trust Co. v. Elmore County National Bank · filed 1991-12-20

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet its burden by “substantial evidence.”

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to present substantial evidence to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment.

Boshell v. Lay · filed 1992-01-31

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. ... In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to produce substantial evidence of a genuine issue of material fact.

Khirieh v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. · filed 1992-02-21

To withstand a summary judgment motion, a nonmoving party must show a genuine issue of material fact by producing "substantial evidence" on the nonmovant's claim or defense. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. ... We agree with McKnight and Khirieh that their evidence that the truck seat was in the highway, given the undisputed circumstances of time and place surrounding it, is substantial evidence that their injuries arose from another's use of a motor vehicle.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence rule to cases filed after June 11, 1987; evidence must be strong enough for fair-minded people to reasonably infer the fact at issue.

Yarbrough v. C & S Family Credit, Inc. · filed 1992-03-20

This case was filed after June 11, 1987; therefore, the "substantial evidence rule" applies. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. "Substantial evidence" is "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12(a) requires a party opposing summary judgment to produce substantial evidence supporting the claim.

Cale v. South Central Bell Telephone Co. · filed 1992-03-27(a)

To defeat a motion for summary judgment, the nonmovant must produce substantial evidence to support his or her claim. Ala. Code 1975, § 12-21-12(a). ... There is no evidence in the record to support a claim of oral misrepresentation.

For actions filed after June 11, 1987, a plaintiff must present substantial evidence to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment.

McGregor v. Landmark Chevrolet, Inc. · filed 1992-03-27

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the “substantial evidence rule,” § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. ... In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence, i.e., “evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.”

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant to meet its burden with substantial evidence in an action not pending on June 11, 1987.

North Courtland v. Town of Courtland · filed 1992-04-03

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant, North Courtland, meet its burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence, and applies to actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Cousins v. Alabama Power Co. · filed 1992-04-10

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule" (§ 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975), for actions filed after June 11, 1987. ... In order to defeat a defendant's properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present "substantial evidence," i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fairminded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion in an action filed after June 11, 1987, to present substantial evidence of a disputed fact.

Battles v. Ford Motor Credit Co. · filed 1992-04-10

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794 (Ala.1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved."

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to rebut the movant's showing with substantial evidence.

Elgin v. Alfa Corp. · filed 1992-04-17

To do this the plaintiffs had to rebut the defendants' prima facie showing by "substantial evidence." See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to produce substantial evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact.

Rothman v. Gamma Alpha Chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha Fraternity · filed 1992-04-24

In opposition to a motion for summary judgment, the nonmovant must produce substantial evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant to present substantial evidence to defeat a properly supported summary judgment motion in actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Sharer v. Bend Millwork Systems, Inc. · filed 1992-05-01

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794 (Ala.1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the nonmovant must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence in actions filed after June 11, 1987.

Harvell v. Johnson · filed 1992-05-01

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794 (Ala. 1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the nonmovant must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact the party seeks to prove.

Hilliard v. CITY OF HUNTSVILLE ELEC. UTILITY BD. · filed 1992-05-22

If this showing is made, the burden then shifts to the nonmovant to rebut the movant's prima facie showing by presenting "substantial evidence" to create a genuine issue of material fact. Substantial evidence is "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989). ... We conclude that Hilliard presented substantial evidence supporting all the requisite elements of a prima facie case of negligence, [3] thereby rebutting the Utility Board's prima facie showing on the motion for summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a supported summary judgment motion to show a genuine issue of material fact with substantial evidence—evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact at issue.

Watson v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co. · filed 1992-05-29

If the movant makes such a showing, then the burden shifts to the nonmovant to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact by "substantial evidence." Substantial evidence is "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989); see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12.

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard when deciding whether a factual dispute should proceed to trial.

Culbreth v. Woodham Plumbing Co., Inc. · filed 1992-05-29

The applicable standard of review is the "substantial evidence" rule, § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. ... Therefore, because Woodham Plumbing's evidence regarding its reason for terminating Culbreth's employment was not so conclusive as to preclude a jury question and because Culbreth's evidence in rebuttal was sufficient to call Woodham Plumbing's reason into question, the court should not have entered the summary judgment.

Section 12-21-12 requires a nonmovant in an action not pending on June 11, 1987, to meet the summary judgment burden with substantial evidence.

Johnson v. BP Oil Co. · filed 1992-06-12

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence standard to summary judgment motions in cases filed after June 11, 1987.

Stinson v. City of Elba · filed 1992-06-12

This case was filed after June 11, 1987; accordingly, the “substantial evidence rule” applies to the ruling on the motion for summary judgment. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12. “In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present ‘substantial evidence,’ i.e., ‘evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.’ ”

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence when the action was not pending on June 11, 1987.

Kendrick v. Alabama Power Co. · filed 1992-06-19

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant meet his burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to produce substantial evidence.

Clay v. River Landing Corp. · filed 1992-06-26

With regard to the breach of contract claim, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to Clay, we hold that Clay failed to produce substantial evidence (see Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12) to rebut the defendants' prima facie showing that there was no genuine issue of material fact and that they were entitled to judgments on that claim.

Section 12-21-12 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present substantial evidence from which fair-minded people could reasonably infer the fact to be proved.

B.K.W. Enterprises v. Tractor Equip. Co. · filed 1992-08-07

The nonmoving party may defeat the moving party's prima facie showing of no genuine issue of material fact by submitting "evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assur. Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870 (Ala.1989) (defining "substantial evidence"); see § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975. ... Reviewing the record in the light most favorable to the non-movant, B.K.W., we find substantial evidence that would allow the jury to find that T & E waived its contractual right to insist on B.K.W.'s strict compliance with the terms of the lease or is estopped from relying on the nonwaiver clause to defeat the purchase option.

For actions filed after June 11, 1987, § 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence of a disputed fact.

Aldridge v. Valley Steel Const., Inc. · filed 1992-08-07

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the "substantial evidence rule," § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. See Bass v. SouthTrust Bank of Baldwin County, 538 So.2d 794, 797-98 (Ala.1989). In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence, i.e., "evidence of such weight and quality that fair minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved." West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989).

Section 12-21-12 requires a plaintiff opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present substantial evidence from which fair minded persons could reasonably infer the fact sought to be proved.

McDowell v. Pegram · filed 1992-08-07

Rule 56 is read in conjunction with the “substantial evidence rule,” § 12-21-12, Ala.Code 1975, for actions filed after June 11, 1987. ... In order to defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence, i.e., “evidence of such weight and quality that fair minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.”

Section 12-21-12 requires substantial evidence to meet the burden on summary judgment in actions not pending on June 11, 1987.

Brewer v. Woodall · filed 1992-08-14

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the Brewers meet their burden by "substantial evidence." ... Considering the complete absence of evidence produced on behalf of the Brewers, we are unable to conclude that the Brewers met their burden under the substantial evidence test.

Section 12-21-12 requires a summary judgment nonmovant to meet the substantial evidence burden when the action was not pending on June 11, 1987.

Ladner v. Inge · filed 1992-08-14

Because this action was not pending on June 11, 1987, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-21-12, mandates that the nonmovant—Ladner—meet her burden by "substantial evidence."

Section 12-21-12 applies the substantial evidence rule to summary judgment motions in cases filed after June 11, 1987.

Parsons v. Maine Fidelity Life Insurance Co. · filed 1992-08-14

This case was filed after June 11, 1987; accordingly, the “substantial evidence rule” applies to the ruling on the motion for summary judgment. See Ala. Code 1975, § 12-21-12.