Martin v. PEI Ohio, Inc., et al., [Ms. SC-2024-0225; SC-2024-0301, Jan. 17, 2025] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2025). The Court (Parker, C.J.; Wise, Bryan, Mendheim, Stewart, and Mitchell, JJ., concur; Shaw, J., concurs in the result; Sellers, J., dissents; Cook, J., recuses) reiterates its strong policy that “Rule 54(b) certifications should be granted only in exceptional cases and that it “disfavors piecemeal appellate review.” Ms. *6. The Court dismisses Sarah Martin’s appeal from the Jefferson Circuit Court’s orders enforcing a settlement agreement and awarding attorney fees to the defendants for Martin’s breach of the agreement.
The Court explains “[b]ecause Martin’s fourth amended complaint remains pending, Martin asked the circuit court to certify as final under Rule 54(b): (1) its January 9, 2024, order enforcing the settlement and (2) its February 21, 2024, order awarding attorney fees to the corporations.” Ms. *5. In concluding that the circuit court exceeded its discretion in certifying the orders as final, the Court concludes “[o]ur Court’s preference to avoid piecemeal litigation outweighs any potential advantages of deciding the settlement’s scope and application. Martin’s pending claims involve the same parties, could result in findings that would moot a large part of these appeals, and could result in different obligations between the parties, particularly on the issue of attorney fees.” Ms. *11.