Areas of Practice

Appellate & Written Advocacy

Overview

The lawyers of Starnes Davis Florie are skilled at handling all facets of the appellate process, with experience as varied as the firm's broad litigation practice. This includes hundreds of appeals in a variety of state and federal appellate courts, including the United States Supreme Court. The firm's lawyers have handled numerous landmark appeals and presented oral arguments before the Alabama Supreme Court, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.


Starnes Davis Florie has cases currently pending in a number of states. The firm has also been retained post-verdict to assume responsibility for preserving a favorable verdict obtained at the trial court level, or seeking reversal of an adverse verdict.


Individual members of the firm have gained insight into the appellate process through judicial clerkships with the Alabama Supreme Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th and 11th Circuits, and the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.


While the firm has had an active appellate practice since its inception, it has recently established a separate Appellate Practice Group focused strictly on such advocacy. The lawyers in the Appellate Practice Group are skilled in assisting clients who require appellate counsel during trial, as well as involvement in appellate issues and written advocacy during the pretrial and post-verdict periods. The firm's appellate lawyers also have experience in preparing amicus curiae briefs and intervening in a pending appeal on behalf of particular industry or professional groups.

The Supreme Court of Alabama appointed appellate attorney, Sybil Newton as a member of the Standing Committee on Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure for the term of March 2009 - October 2012. The Standing Committee on Rules of Appellate Procedure propose amendments to the Supreme Court of Alabama for adoption of new rules and advises the Court on changes to the existing Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Representative appeals include:

  • Coilplus-Alabama, Inc. v. Johnnie F. Vann; Sirote & Permutt, P.C.: Successful in obtaining an affirmance by the Alabama Supreme Court of summary judgment for defendants in a legal malpractice action arising from multi-million dollar bond issue.
  • The University of Alabama in a trademark dispute with sports artist Daniel A. Moore: Currently handling an appeal to the 11th Circuit.
  • City of Tarrant v. Green: Currently pending appeal before the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals. The underlying action alleges wrongful termination of city employee.
  • Bill Salter Advertising v. City of Atmore: The issue surrounds constitutional rights of outdoor advertising company and constitutionality of city zoning ordinance. The 11th Circuit entered an order affirming the District Court's judgment in favor of the City.
  • Groover v. Johnston: Pending appeal before the Alabama Supreme Court. Underlying issue involves sufficiency of proof of the element of causation under the Alabama Medical Liability Act.
  • Riscorp Inc. v. Norman: The firm was hired as appellate counsel after a Lowndes County jury returned a multi-million dollar verdict against the defendant. The firm was successful in having the verdict overturned on appeal. The judgment was reversed and remanded, and the case was ultimately dismissed with prejudice.
  • Atkins v. McInteer: This is a landmark case in which oral argument was granted before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court held that the requirements of FRCP 9(b) should be rigidly applied in False Claims Act cases, requiring that the Plaintiff's claims alleging fraudulent billing be pled with particularity in order to survive a Motion to Dismiss.
  • Pearson v. Poole: The firm was hired post-judgment to appeal a grant of summary judgment in a breach of contract case. The Alabama Supreme Court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.
  • Williams v. Spring Hill Memorial Hospital: This is an important medical malpractice opinion in which the firm served as both trial and appellate counsel. The Alabama Supreme Court's opinion sets forth the standard for determining causation under the Alabama Medical Liability Act.
  • Breaux v. Thurston: The Alabama Supreme Court clarified the manner in which juries are charged in retained foreign object cases in Alabama. The case was handled by the firm both at the trial court level and on appeal.
  • Ex parte Drummond Co.: The Alabama Supreme Court clarified the law regarding when an injury to a scheduled part of the body (such as an arm or leg) could be compensated like an injury to a non-scheduled part of the body (such as the back). The Court overruled numerous decisions by the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals and held that compensation could only be awarded outside of the schedule if there was sufficient evidence of the injury extending to another part of the body. The decision is favorable for employers in Alabama as it reduces the amount a trial court can award in a scheduled injury case.
  • Keck v. Dryvit Systems, Inc.: This is a favorable opinion affirming summary judgment for Defendants in an action brought by homeowners against the manufacturer, distributor, and installers of an exterior insulation system. The firm was involved at both the trial court and appellate level.
  • Drummond v. Harris: This is an important appeal holding that the evidence was insufficient to establish that mining employee suffered from pneumoconiosis.
  • Finebaum v. Coulter: In this lawsuit between two local sportscasters alleging defamation, conspiracy, outrage, and invasion of privacy, the Alabama Supreme Court analyzed the parties' rights under the First Amendment and reversed and remanded the case with instructions to the trial court to enter summary judgment on all counts in favor of the Defendant sportscaster represented by the firm.
  • Price v. University of Alabama: The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the trial court's dismissal of all of the former head football coach's claims against the president of the University of Alabama based on discretionary immunity. This firm handled both the underlying case and the appeal.
  • McAfee by and through McAfee v. Baptist Medical Center: This case was handled by the firm both at the trial court level and on appeal to the Alabama Supreme Court. The Court, in a significant opinion, rejected the "loss of chance" doctrine in Alabama.
  • Ex parte Vaughn Regional Medical Center: On a petition for Writ of Mandamus filed by Plaintiff, the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the trial court's ruling that in an action against a hospital for negligent credentialing of a physician, the physician's credentialing file was prohibited from discovery under Alabama's peer review statute. The court also held that the statute was constitutional. Starnes Davis Florie handled the case at both the trial court level and on appeal.
  • McGuffey Health and Rehabilitation Center v. Zadie Gibson, by and through her next friend, Dorothy Jackson: This was the first case in which an Alabama appellate court held an arbitration agreement to be enforceable in a medical malpractice/healthcare case. In reaching this conclusion, Court held that Medicare funding should be considered in evaluating the interstate commerce issue.
  • Greenbriar v. City of Mountain Brook: The Plaintiff filed this action against a municipality, asserting that the municipality violated its constitutional rights by enacting a city ordinance providing that Plaintiff's land disturbance permit, as well as all other permits, expired by a certain date. After a trial on the merits, the District Court held that Plaintiff's procedural due process rights were violated, but not Plaintiff's substantive due process rights. Both parties appealed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit heard oral argument and reversed the District Court's ruling that the municipality had violated Plaintiff's procedural due process rights. The Court of Appeals also affirmed the District Court's holding dismissing Plaintiff's substantive due process claim.