Jamison, etc. v. SNH AL Crimson Tenant, Inc., etc., [Ms. SC-2023-0861, May 17, 2024] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2024). The Court (Cook, J.; Parker, C.J., and Wise, Sellers, and Stewart, JJ., concur) reverses the Jefferson Circuit Court’s order compelling arbitration.
This appeal arises from a lawsuit alleging mistreatment of a resident at the Morningside assisted-living facility, and Morningside’s motion to compel arbitration. Morningside filed a reply containing new arguments and additional supporting evidence. The trial court granted Morningside’s motion to compel arbitration the following day.
In reversing, the Court notes that a motion to compel arbitration is analogous to a motion for a summary judgment. Ms. *19. Therefore, Rule 56, Ala. R. Civ. P. also applies to a motion to compel arbitration. Id. Thus, the Court concludes that “to the extent that the circuit court relied on the newly submitted evidence” in Morningside’s reply, that reliance was improper because the Plaintiff was denied an opportunity to respond. Ms. *20. Specifically, the Court cites Rule 56(c)’s 10-day notice requirement. Id.
However, “‘noncompliance with the 10-day-notice requirement does not constitute reversible error absent a showing of actual prejudice.’” Tucker v. Richard M. Scrushy Charitable Found., Inc., 93 So. 3d 83, 87 (Ala. 2012). Ms. *20. Therefore, the Court considered whether the evidentiary materials filed with Morningside’s initial motion to compel were sufficient, by themselves, to support the trial court’s order. Ms. **20-21. The Court concludes they were not and holds the failure to provide the Plaintiff an opportunity to respond was not harmless error.