Case: 19-12418 Date Filed: 09/01/2020 Page: 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 19-12418-HH
________________________

THAI MEDITATION ASSOCIATION OF ALABAMA, INC.,

(the "Center"),
SIVAPORN NIMITYONGSKUL,
VARIN NIMITYONGSKUL,
SERENA NIMITYONGSKUL,
PRASIT NIMITYONGSKUL,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

CITY OF MOBILE PLANNING COMMISSION, et. al.,

Defendants,

CITY OF MOBILE, ALABAMA,

Defendant - Appellee.
________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama
________________________

ORDER:

The parties are hereby directed to file supplemental letter briefs. The supplemental letter

briefs shall address the following questions:

1. Alabama Rule of Appellate Procedure 18 provides, in relevant part, that a

federal court may certify a question of state law to the Alabama Supreme
Court “[w]hen it shall appear . . . that there are involved in any proceeding
before it questions or propositions of [Alabama law] which are determinative
of said cause and that there are no clear controlling precedents” from the
Alabama Supreme Court. Ala. R. App. P. 18(a). As used in Rule 18, what
does the phrase “determinative of said cause” mean—determinative of the
entire case as to all parties, determinative of the case with respect to one party
 Case: 19-12418 Date Filed: 09/01/2020 Page: 2 of 2

or group of parties, determinative of a single identifiable claim, determinative

of a key legal issue, or something else entirely? See, e.g., Comeens v. HM
Operating, Inc., No. 6:14-cv-00521-JHE, 2015 WL 12979134 (Jan. 20, 2015)
(discussing Rule 18); Wyeth, Inc. v. Weeks, 159 So. 3d 649 (Ala. 2014)
(same); Volvo Cars of N. Am., Inc. v. Ricci, 137 P.3d 1161 (Nev. 2006)
(comparing competing interpretations of the phrase “determinative of [the]
cause” in state certification provisions); 17A Wright & Miller, Fed. Prac. &
Proc. § 4828 (3d ed. 2020) (same).

2. In the context of this case, would certifying a question regarding the nature of
the “burden” required to make out a claim under the Alabama Religious
Freedom Amendment, Ala. Const. art. I, § 3.01(II)(3)—whether “mere
burden,” “substantial burden,” or some other showing—satisfy Rule 18’s
“determinative of said cause” standard?

The supplemental letter briefs are due on or before 5:00 P.M. ET on September 8, 2020.

The parties’ letters shall not exceed five (5) single-spaced pages.

DAVID J. SMITH
Clerk of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

ENTERED FOR THE COURT - BY DIRECTION