27 So. 3d 1283 - Rdb v. Ac’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““We have held that a man in the biological father’s position does have a right to intervene in a custody case concerning a child he claims to have fathered because ‘“the matter of custody of a child to which one seeks to establish paternity is a matter of such interest as to provide intervention of right,” ’ W.D.R.[ v. H.M.], 897 So.2d [327,] 330 [ (Ala.Civ.App.2004) ] (quoting Finkenbinder v. Burton, 452 So.2d 880, 883 (Ala.Civ.App.1984), superseded by statute as noted in Foster v. Whitley, 564 So.2d 990, 991 (Ala.Civ.App.1990)). However, although such a man has a right to intervene, as noted above, the pivotal issue of the biological father’s standing to actually prove his paternity of [the child] turns on whether the legal father persists in his presumption of paternity. W.D.R., 897 So.2d at 331. In W.D.R., we were presented with the question of what happens after a man in the same position as the biological father in the present case is permitted to intervene. Id. at 330-31. We held, based on a similar holding in J.O.J. v. R.R., 895 So.2d 336, 340 (Ala.Civ.App.2004), that ‘a man seeking to establish paternity of a child born during the mother’s marriage to another man must be given the opportunity to establish standing in an eviden-tiary hearing where he and others may present evidence bearing on whether the presumed father ... persisted in his presumption of paternity.’ W.D.R., 897 So.2d at 331.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. J.S.M. v. Cleburne County Department of Human Resources