BRYAN, Judge.
Deborah Brady appeals from an arbitration award in favor of Roebuck Honda. We transfer the appeal to the Jefferson Circuit Court.
In July 2004, Brady sued Roebuck Honda and Honda Corporation in the circuit court, alleging negligence, wantonness, and claims under the Alabama Extended Manufacturer's Liability Doctrine. In her complaint, Brady alleged that she had been injured in an accident when the brakes of her Honda Accord automobile had failed while she was driving it. In November 2004, Roebuck Honda filed a motion to compel arbitration, and the circuit court granted that motion in February 2005. Also in February 2005, Honda Corporation was dismissed from the action pursuant to a settlement agreement.
On August 28, 2009, the arbitrator rendered an award in favor of Roebuck Honda. Although it is unclear, the record on appeal suggests that Brady received notice of the arbitration award on September 9, 2009. Thirty days later, on October 9, 2009, Brady, acting pro se, filed in the circuit court a notice of appeal to this court from the arbitration award. Brady also filed a copy of the arbitration award with
Initially, we address whether Brady followed the proper procedure by filing her notice of appeal to this court. Rule 71B, Ala. R. Civ. P., which became effective February 1, 2009, establishes the procedure for appealing the arbitration award in this case. Rule 71B "supersedes the procedure set out in § 6-6-15[, Ala.Code 1975]." Parham v. American Bankers Ins. Co. of Florida, 24 So.3d 1102, 1104 n. 2 (Ala.2009); see also Committee Comments to Rule 71B Effective February 1, 2009 ("[Rule 71B] clarifies the method for taking an appeal from an arbitration award and supersedes the procedure provided by Ala.Code 1975, § 6-6-15.").
Section § 6-6-15 provides, in pertinent part:
(Emphasis added.) In Horton Homes, Inc. v. Shaner, 999 So.2d 462 (Ala.2008), our supreme court clarified and modified the procedure for appealing an arbitration award under § 6-6-15, Ala.Code 1975. However, Horton Homes did not modify the requirement under § 6-6-15 that a party seeking to challenge an arbitration award initiated that challenge by filing, in the circuit court, a notice of appeal to the "appropriate appellate court." Pursuant to the procedure set out in Horton Homes, the clerk of the circuit court then entered the arbitration award as the "conditional" judgment of the circuit court. 999 So.2d at 467. The party challenging the award was then required to "file in the appropriate circuit court a [Rule 59(e), Ala. R. Civ. P.,] motion to alter, amend, vacate, or set aside the award within 30 days of filing the notice of appeal of the arbitration award and the clerk's entry of the conditional judgment based thereon." Id. at 468. If the circuit court denied that Rule 59(e) motion or it was denied by operation of law, see Rule 59.1, Ala. R. Civ. P., the conditional judgment became final, and the appeal was "processed based on the prior notice of appeal" that had been filed to the appropriate appellate court. Id.
As noted, this case is governed by the procedure established by Rule 71B, which supersedes the procedure established by § 6-6-15, which Horton Homes clarified and modified. Rule 71B provides:
Rule 71B(c) provides that "[t]he notice of appeal shall be filed with the clerk of the circuit court," but the text of that rule does not explicitly state to which court the appeal is filed. However, the Committee Comments to Rule 71B Effective February 1, 2009, provide, in pertinent part:
(Initial emphasis added.)
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that Rule 71B requires a party seeking to challenge an arbitration award to file an initial notice of appeal to the appropriate circuit court. The aggrieved party must file such an appeal and file a Rule 59 motion to set aside or vacate the judgment entered by the circuit clerk on the arbitration award to preserve a subsequent appeal to this court or the supreme court. Rule 71B(g) indicates that, to attain appellate review by this court or the supreme court, an aggrieved party must file a second notice of appeal in addition to the initial notice of appeal filed to the circuit court. Rule 71B(g) states: "Appellate review. An appeal may be taken from the grant or denial of any Rule 59 motion challenging the award by filing a notice of appeal to the appropriate appellate court pursuant to Rule 4, [Ala. R.App. P.]." Therefore, unlike the prior procedure governing an appeal from an arbitration award, Rule 71B establishes a procedure in which a party challenging an award must file two notices of appeal to attain review by this court or the supreme court. The first notice of appeal is filed to the appropriate circuit court, and, if the aggrieved party's required Rule 59 motion is subsequently denied, the second notice of appeal, from the denial of the Rule 59 motion, is filed to the appropriate appellate court.
We recognize that in Hurst v. Eagles Landing IV, Ltd., 20 So.3d 143, 149 (Ala. Civ.App.2009), this court, in dicta, stated:
However, our decision today concludes that there are additional differences between the procedure established by Rule 71B and the procedure found in Horton Homes. Thus, we overrule any contrary dicta in Hurst to the extent that it may be read as conflicting with this opinion.
In this case, Brady filed her notice of appeal from the arbitration award to this court. However, based on our decision today, we conclude that Brady should have filed her notice of appeal to the circuit court, pursuant to Rule 71B.
APPEAL TRANSFERRED.
THOMPSON, P.J., and PITTMAN, THOMAS, and MOORE, JJ., concur.