Witherall v. Strane’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The intent to dedicate to public use is the foundation of every dedication. And the burden of proving a dedication rests upon the party asserting it. State ex rel. Davis v. Meaher, 213 Ala. 466, 484 , 105 So. 562 ; Burleson v. Town of Hamilton, 213 Ala. 198, 200 , 104 So. 253 ; Smith v. City of Dothan, 211 Ala. 338, 340 , 100 So. 501 . ‘Dedication is an affirmative act, and must be shown by affirmative evidence or its equivalent. If the acts and declarations of the owner are equivocal, they are insufficient to establish a dedication. * * * [t]he intent to dedicate to the public use must be shown by unequivocal acts upon which the public has a right to rely.’ Burleson v. Town of Hamilton, supra [ 213 Ala. 198 , 104 So. 254 ]. In Smith v. City of Dothan, supra [ 211 Ala. 338 , 100 So. 502 ], the rule was recognized ‘that to establish a dedication the clearest intention on the part of the owner to that effect must be shown, and that the evidence must be clear and cogent and the acts of the owner relied on to establish a dedication must be unequivocal in their indication of the owner’s intention to create a public right exclusive of his own.’ ” Witherall v. Strane, 265 Ala. 218, 222-223 , 90 So.2d 251, 255 .”

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