Ex Parte General Motors Corp.

Summary

On certiorari, the Supreme Court of Alabama clarified the burden of proof on a summary-judgment movant, adopting Justice Houston's special concurrence in Berner v. Caldwell and holding that a movant need not submit affirmative evidence negating the nonmovant's claim but may rely on any Rule 56(c) materials showing no triable issue; it overruled Berner to the extent Berner had overruled Lawson State, but applied the restored rule prospectively only. Applying the law as it then existed, the Court affirmed the Court of Civil Appeals' reversal of summary judgment on Aaron Tucker's breach-of-express-warranty claims yet remanded with instructions that the trial court vacate those judgments, permit Tucker to supplement the record, and rule anew. The Court affirmed summary judgment for GM on the implied-warranty claims because Alabama's UCC imposes implied warranties only on sellers and the complaint named only the dealership, affirmed summary judgment for the dealership on the fitness-for-a-particular-purpose claim for lack of evidence of reliance, and affirmed reversal of summary judgment on the implied-warranty-of-merchantability claim, holding expert testimony unnecessary and rejecting the dealership's spoliation defense because its mechanics had repeatedly inspected the car.