Hall v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““On November 4, 2011, the State of Alabama filed a complaint seeking the forfeiture of the currency. The claimants were served on January 26,.2012. After a November 15, 2012, trial, the trial court entered a judgment on. January 8, 2013, condemning, and ordering the forfeiture of the currency. On January 30, 2013, the claimants moved the trial court to alter, amend, or vacate its judgment; that motion was denied by operation of law on April 30, 2013. See Rule 59.1, Ala. R. Civ. P. On June 7, 2013, the claimants filed their notice of appeal,””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hall

2. ““Section 20-2-93(c), Ala.Code 1975, pro.vides that forfeiture proceedings ‘shall be instituted promptly.’ ... U “Based on the facts and circumstances of the present case, particularly the complete lack of evidence of the reason for the seven-week delay in the institution of the forfeiture proceedings, we conclude that the State failed to institute the forfeiture proceedings promptly.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hall