Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 246 Ala. 218 - Ex Parte Finley

Ex Parte Finley’s Empirical Analysis

1944

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
September 2007
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently September 2007

7 state decisions

201944195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Ex Parte Rosenblum · Lewis v. Martin · Penton v. Brown-Crummer Inv. Co. · Van Antwerp v. Board of Com'rs · Jasper Land Co. v. City of Jasper

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

  1. “"The general rule, and controlling here, is that the courts will not institute an inquiry into the motives of the legislative department in determining the validity of ordinances enacted by them for local improvements. Cram[p]ton v. City of Montgomery , 171 Ala. 478 , 482 , 55 So. 122 [(1911)]; 32 A.L.R. 1524 ; 37 Am. Jur. p. 821 , § 182. This is because, in making such law, the municipal council is exercising a legislative function and its authorized legislative acts are not subject to impeachment because of bad faith or improper motives. Cram[p]ton case, supra; A[bl]es v. Southern Ry. Co. , 164 Ala. 356 , 365 , 51 So. 327 [(1909)]; Clements v. Commission of City of Birmingham , 215 Ala. 59 , 61 , 109 So. 158 [(1926)]; Talladega v. Jackson-Tinney Lumber Co. , 209 Ala. 106 , 110 , 95 So. 455 [(1923)]."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.