Braswell v. Braswell
In Braswell v. Braswell, 574 So. 2d 790 (Ala. 1991) a settlement agreement, which was incorporated into a final judgment of divorce, provided that if the husband "sold" certain shares of stock in Patterson & Wilder Construction Company, Inc., within five years of the agreement, the wife was entitled to receive 1/2 of the proceeds. The husband exchanged the Patterson & Wilder stock for stock in D.C. Braswell Construction Company, Inc. The parties disagreed over whether the "exchange" of stock constituted a "sale."
Among the claims the wife asserted against the husband was a claim of intentional interference with a business relationship. The trial court entered a partial summary judgment in favor of the wife, holding that the term "sale" encompassed the exchange of the stock. The trial court "struck" the other portions of the wife's complaint.
In Braswell, the Court upheld the trial court's holding that the term "sale" encompassed the exchange of stock. This Court then remanded the case for a trial on the merits of the wife's remaining claims, including the claim alleging intentional interference, stating that those claims were "ripe for consideration by the trial court." 574 So. 2d at 794.
The Court specifically stated in Braswell that the intentional-interference cause of action "could have accrued only after May 25, 1988, which is the date the trial court determined that Cay Braswell became a stockholder in D.C. Braswell Construction Company, Inc." 574 So. 2d at 794.