Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 270 ALA 691 - Bell v. Brooks

Bell v. Brooks’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
May 1973
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Gentry v. Swann Chemical Co. · Steagall v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co. · Hammons v. Hammons · De Arman v. Ingalls Iron Works Co. · Demopolis Telephone Co. v. Hood

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

  1. ““In the instant case, neither count of the amended complaint even attempts to comply by its averments with the requirements of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 304, Title 26, Code 1940. The complaint should conform to the statute or should state facts showing that it did not apply. Kasulka v. Louisville & N. R. Co., supra [ 213 Ala. 463 , 105 So. 187 ]. “There is no allegation of fact in the instant complaint to negative the applicability of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. There is an averment as a conclusion that defendant did not come within that statute, but statement of a conclusion is not sufficient. Facts must be alleged.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““We therefore hold that when a suit is brought by an employee against the employer for injuries arising since the Workmen’s Compensation Law became effective, the complaint should conform to said law, else set up a state of facts showing the inapplicability of same and bringing it within the influence of the law upon which the complaint is grounded and upon which reliance is had for a recovery.” (Emphasis supplied.) 205 Ala. 103 , 87 So. 789 .”
    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.