the trial court granted M & F’s motion and dismissed FATIC’s counterclaims, thus disposing of all outstanding claims in the action. In its order entering a judgment in favor of M & F, the trial court also set forth the schedule for the parties to submit evidence and arguments regarding FATIC’s request for attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the ALAA. M & F subsequently moved the trial court for its own award of attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the ALAA as well. On August 14, 2012, M & F filed its notice of appeal, challenging the trial court’s August 25, 2011, order entering a summary judgment in favor of FATIC on M & F’s negligence, breach-of-contract, and bad-faith claims (appeal docketed as case no. 1111525). See Gonzalez, LLC v. DiVincenti, 844 So.2d 1196, 1201 (Ala. 2002) (<HOLDING>). On September 7, 2012, FATIC filed its
holding summary judgment order was not a final judgment because it did not dispose of the defendants claim for attorneys fees holding a summary judgment to be final although motion to assess attorney fees remained pending because award of attorney fees is collateral to judgment holding that the requirement to serve a motion for attorney fees or costs within thirty days after filing of judgment applies even where the final judgment reserves jurisdiction to award same holding because an award of attorney fees is discretionary court may consider attorney fees in relation to the underlying equities in the case holding that a summary judgment was final and appealable even though a request for attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the alaa remained pending because any award of attorney fees is collateral to the judgment