Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

623 So. 2d 326

Wooten v. Wooten

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided April 2, 1993

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · decided 1993-04-02

Relies on 588 So. 2d 889 - Lockett v. A.L. Sandlin Lumber Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1993-04-02

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 2018

11 state decisions

70199320002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1The parties were divorced in March 1992 because of incompatibility. In July 1992, Billy Wooten (husband) filed a “MOTION FOR CORRECTION OF MARRIAGE RECORD ... AND REQUEST FOR ANNULMENT,” and alleged that Theresa Renee Goodwin Wooten (wife) had never been divorced from a prior marriage and, therefore, was guilty of bigamy in her marriage to the husband. Subsequently, the trial court denied the husband’s motion for annulment and dismissed his pleading because of untimeliness. The husband appealed pro se.

¶2In virtually every respect, the husband’s brief fails to comply with the requirements of Rule 28(a), Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure. The brief contains no table of contents, no table of cases, no statement of the case, no statement of issues, no statement of the facts, no citations to the record, and no citations to authorities. Such non-compliance provides nothing to review on appeal. Lockett v. A.L. Sandlin Lumber Co., 588 So.2d 889 (Ala.Civ.App.1991). Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is due to be affirmed.

¶3AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.
/623/so2d/326 · .json · Public domain