Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

148 So. 3d 64

Hardy v. Smith

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided April 12, 2013

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · decided 2013-04-12

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 2015

1 state decisions

Relies on 773 So. 2d 475 - Ex Parte Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Al.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2013-04-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1On Application far Rehearing

MOORE, Judge.

¶2On application for rehearing, Doris Hardy argues that, as to her unjust-enrichment claim, Ronald W. Smith and Nancy R. Smith should carry the burden of proving that Hardy received a benefit sufficient to offset her payments. We note, however, that “generally a plaintiff bears the burden of proving the essential elements of his [or her] claims.” Ex parte Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Alabama, 773 So.2d 475, 478 (Ala.2000). Here, Hardy has cited no legal authority contrary to the general rule. Thus, we overrule Hardy’s application for a rehearing.

¶3APPLICATION OVERRULED.

¶4THOMPSON, P.J., and PITTMAN and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

¶5DONALDSON, J., recuses himself.

/148/so3d/64 · .json · Public domain