Davis v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘ “ ‘The test for mootness is commonly stated as whether the court’s action on the merits would affect the rights of the parties.’ Crawford v. State, 153 S.W.3d 497, 501 (Tex. App. 2004) (citing VE Corp. v. Ernst & Young, 860 S.W.2d 83, 84 (Tex. 1993)). ‘A case becomes moot if at any stage there ceases to be an actual controversy between the parties.’ Id. (emphasis added) (citing National Collegiate Athletic Ass’n v. Jones, 1 S.W.3d 83, 86 (Tex. 1999)).” “‘Chapman v. Gooden, 974 So.2d 972, 983 (Ala. 2007) (first emphasis added). See also Steffel v. Thompson, 415 U.S. 452 , 459 n.10, 94 S.Ct. 1209 , 39 L.Ed.2d 505 (1974) (“[A]n actual controversy must be extant at all .stages of review, not merely at the. time the complaint is filed.”).’ “South Alabama Gas Dist. v. Knight, 138 So.3d 971, 974-75 (Ala. 2013). “‘“[A]n appeal will be dismissed as moot ‘if an event happening after hearing and decree in circuit court, but before appeal is taken, or pending appeal, makes determination of the appeal unnecessary or renders it clearly impossible for the appellate court to grant effectual relief.’” Masonry Arts, [Inc. v. Mobile Cty. Comm’n,] 628 So.2d [334] at 335 [ (Ala. 1993)], quoting Morrison v. Mullins, 275 Ala. 258, 259 , 154 So.2d 16, 18 (1963).’ “Estate of Mollett v. M & B Builders, L.L.C., 749 So.2d 466, 469 (Alai Civ. App. 1999).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. C.J. v. T.J.

2. “'[A]n appeal does not ordinarily supersede the judgment in the absence of a supersedeas bond.' St. Regis Paper Co. v. Kerlin , 476 So.2d 64 , 66 (Ala. 1985) (citing Moore v. LeFlore , 288 Ala. 315 , 260 So.2d 585 (1972) ). " 'The purpose of requiring a supersedeas bond is to preserve the status quo pending the appeal. Ex parte Spriggs Enterprises, Inc. , 376 So.2d 1088 (Ala. 1979). When one appeals without posting a supersedeas bond, the appellee's right to enforce the judgment is not suspended during the appeal, and, whatever measures are necessary for the execution of the judgment, it is the duty of the trial court to pursue them on application of the party in interest. Ex parte Dekle , 278 Ala. 307 , [309,] 178 So.2d 85 [, 86] (1965).' " Baker v. Bennett , 660 So.2d 980 , 982 (Ala. 1995).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Curtis v. Curtis (Ex parte Curtis)

3. “' "The duty of this court, as of every other judicial tribunal, is to decide actual controversies by a judgment which can be carried into effect, and not to give opinions upon moot questions or abstract propositions, or to declare principles or rules of law which cannot affect the matter in issue in the case before it.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Crosby v. Seminole Landing Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc.