SAI MONTGOMERY BCH, LLC, d/b/a Classic Cadillac, and Andrew Harper
v.
Donald WILLIAMS and Mary E. Williams.
Page 1049
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 1050
Appeal
from Montgomery Circuit Court (CV-18-900898)
R.
Austin Huffaker, Jr., of Rushton, Stakely, Johnston &
Garrett, P.A., Montgomery, for appellants.
Michael J. Crow and Larry A. Golston, Jr., of Beasley, Allen,
Crow, Methvin, Portis, and Miles, P.C., Montgomery, for
appellees.
STEWART,
Justice.
SAI
Montgomery BCH, LLC, d/b/a Classic Cadillac
("Cadillac"), and Andrew Harper, general manager
for Cadillac (hereinafter referred to collectively as
"the Cadillac defendants"), appeal from an order of
the Montgomery Circuit Court ("the trial court")
denying their motions to compel arbitration. Because we
conclude that the trial court was without jurisdiction to
enter the order appealed from, we dismiss the appeal.
Facts
and Procedural History
In
December 2016, Mary E. Williams leased and took possession of
a 2017 Cadillac XT5 automobile ("the XT5") from
Cadillac. Cadillac required Donald Williams, Mary's
husband, to cosign and provide his financial information as a
prerequisite to approving financing for the XT5. Donald and
Mary both executed the lease agreement, which contained an
arbitration agreement. In mid-January 2017, Cadillac
contacted Donald requesting additional financial information,
which Donald provided. The day after Donald provided the
requested information, Cadillac left a message for Mary to
return to Cadillac's dealership with the XT5 on January
23, 2017. The Williamses did not go to Cadillac's
dealership as requested and did not have any further contact
directly with Cadillac. The Williamses had submitted two
lease payments. On January 26, 2017, Mary was contacted by a
private investigator working for Cadillac who was attempting
to locate the XT5. On January 27, 2017, Mary filed a consumer
complaint against Cadillac with the State of Alabama's
Attorney
Page 1051
General's Office. On January 30, 2017, the Williamses
complied with a request from local law enforcement to come to
the police station. The Williamses provided copies of the
bill of sale, tag receipt, and leasing information for the
XT5. The following day, law enforcement seized the XT5. On
February 1, 2017, the Williamses arranged a meeting with law
enforcement, but both Donald and Mary were arrested for theft
of property when they arrived at the police station. A grand
jury ultimately refused to return an indictment on the
charges.
On May
15, 2018, the Williamses sued the Cadillac defendants and
fictitiously named defendants, asserting against the Cadillac
defendants claims of malicious prosecution, slander,
defamation, abuse of process, and conversion and against
Cadillac wanton hiring, training, and/or supervision. On June
15, 2018, Cadillac filed a motion seeking to compel
arbitration and to stay the trial-court proceedings,
supported with an affidavit from Harper. On July 2, 2018,
Harper, after being served, likewise filed a motion seeking
to compel arbitration and to stay the trial-court
proceedings, expressly adopting and incorporating
Cadillac's previously filed motion. On July 5, 2018, the
trial court entered an order granting Cadillac's motion
to compel arbitration and to stay the proceedings.
On July
17, 2018, the Williamses filed a motion seeking to vacate the
July 5, 2018, order compelling arbitration. In their motion,
the Williamses identified the motion as being filed pursuant
to Rule 60(b)(6), Ala. R. Civ. P., and complained that they
had not been notified that the case had been reassigned to
another judge.[1] On October 11, 2018, the trial court
entered an order setting an October 30 hearing on all pending
motions. On October 23, 2018, the Williamses filed a response
in opposition to the Cadillac defendants' motions to
compel arbitration. The Cadillac defendants filed a reply in
which they asserted, among other things, that the
Williamses' July 17 motion had been denied by operation
of law pursuant to Rule 59.1, Ala. R. Civ. P., and that the
trial court was without jurisdiction to rule on the
Williamses' postjudgment motion.
On
November 13, 2018, the trial court entered an order
purporting to deny the Cadillac defendants' motions to
compel arbitration. On December 6, 2018, the Cadillac
...