¶2For the reasons explained in the review of Jones v. Kennedy,890 So.2d 975 (Ala. 2004), and Ex parte Alabama Institute forDeaf Blind, 578 So.2d 1308 (Ala. 1991), in Part III of the main opinion, I agree that, at this juncture, Tatum's request to obtain judicial review by means of a common-law writ of certiorari is premature. Furthermore, viewed in the light of that prematurity, the circumstances presented by Tatum do not provide a basis for the declaratory *1224 or injunctive relief requested by Tatum or for the relief she requests by means of a writ of mandamus. It is for this reason that I concur in the result reached by the main opinion.
893 So. 2d 1213
Tatum v. Freeman
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
Decided June 11, 2004
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · decided 2004-06-11
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 2006
2 state decisions
Relies on 578 So. 2d 1308 - Ex Parte Ala. Inst. for Deaf and Blind · Jones v. Kennedy
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 2004-06-11
View the full empirical analysis of this case →