Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?


Alabama Supreme Court Grants Stay in AG’s Appeal of Greenetrack

By Susan Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

MONTGOMERY—On Wednesday, the Alabama Supreme Court (ASC) granted a stay, before the deadline, for a response from the attorneys for Greenetrack had expired.

Circuit Judge Houston L. Brown, ruled on June 22, that the machines seized from Greenetrack were, in fact, bingo machines and therefore legal in the State of Alabama. The State responded on July 7, with an Emergency Motion for Stay, Pending Appeal and Memorandum in Support of the ASC.

Rule 27(a) of the Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure provides 7 days for other party’s response, in opposition to a motion, unless the court shortens the time for response.

“[a]ny party may file a response in opposition to a motion, other than one for a procedural order (for which see subdivision (b)), within 7 days (1 week) after service of the motion; but the court may shorten or extend the time for responding to any motion.”

Since the court did not enter such an order, the time for the response would not have expired until July 14.

On Monday, counsel for Greenetrack called the Supreme Court Clerk’s office and confirmed, with a staff attorney, that Greenetrack had 7 days to respond to the motion. A source close to the case said, “Without shortening the time, without allowing a response, and without adhering to its own rules, this Court entered an order granting the stay, before the time had expired for Greenetrack to respond.”

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Greenetrack attorneys intend to file a motion to reconsider asking the court to withdraw its order, and to consider arguments in their response, as to why there should not be a stay granted.



The court found "clear and convincing evidence" of Jinks' alleged racist and sexually inappropriate behavior.


The filing comes a couple of weeks after the Alabama Supreme Court's latest attempt to unilaterally end electronic bingo.

Featured Opinion

A conservative columnist said GreeneTrack was violating the law. Small problem: the track had followed the guidance of the AG's Office.


Moore sued his accusers alleging political conspiracy, defamation, wantonness, negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress.