On appeal, Alexander contended that the circuit court erred in dismissing his appeal based on his failure to pay the filing fee within 14 days of the entry of the district court's judgment. The Court of Civil Appeals stated that not paying a filing fee was not grounds for dismissing an appeal. Specifically the Court held that “our research has revealed no legal support for the circuit court's decision to dismiss Alexander's appeal on the ground that Alexander had not filed a filing fee within 14 days of the entry of the district court's judgment.” Accordingly, the circuit court's judgment was reversed, and the case was remanded to that court for further proceedings.

The Alabama State Board of Pharmacy ("the board") petitioned the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals for a writ of mandamus directing the Montgomery Circuit Court ("the circuit court") to vacate its "order supplementing stay on a temporary basis" ("the supplemental order") entered on January 5, 2017. The supplemental order added certain requirements to a stay order ("the stay order") entered by the circuit court on December 1, 2016, that, among other things, put in place specific restrictions on Demetrius Yvonne Parks's ability to practice pharmacy pending judicial review of the board's decision to suspend her license to practice pharmacy. The stay order also directed a pharmacy owned by Parks to meet specific requirements during the pendency of the judicial review.

A petition for a writ of mandamus is the proper vehicle for seeking review of an order staying the suspension of a professional license pending the judicial review of the licensing agency's decision. In its mandamus petition, the board argued that the circuit court had entered the supplemental order without giving the board an opportunity to be heard and without any evidentiary support from any of the parties. The Court cited Ala. Code. § 41-22-20(c), which provides that the board must have an opportunity to present evidence to challenge the presumption that a stay, or the conditions placed on a stay, is proper. The Court thus held that “entering the supplemental order that essentially removed the conditions on Parks's ability to practice pharmacy, which had been included in the stay order, without first giving the board the opportunity to challenge the relief Parks sought, the circuit court erred.” Accordingly, the petition was granted and the writ issued.