Whitlow v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1945
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently August 1995
14 state decisions
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 Roubicek v. Roubicek · 31 Ala. App. 77 - Kabase v. State · Branyon v. Kirk · Turner v. De Priest · State v. Mobile O. R. Co.
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The mere fact that appellee did not make the stereotyped proffer of introducing the [deposition] in evidence could not result in prejudicial error because the court considered it. It was presented in open court ... and was noted as evidence. It was referred to and inspected by the witnesses who testified regarding it. This, together with the agreement of counsel above, satisfied the requisites for admissibility and consideration by the court. The tenor of its proffer was immaterial. It was presented in open court and became evidence — the fact it imported — when properly identified and exhibited before the court. Kabase v. State, 31 Ala.App. 77 , 12 So.2d 758, 764 (12).””
1 later decision 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.