State Ex Rel. Baxley v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 63 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably Giles v. State (1977), Fletcher v. Tuscaloosa Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n (1975)
4 federal appellate · 63 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 City of Mobile v. Gulf Development Co. · Capps v. Norden · Alabama-Tennessee Natural Gas Co. v. City of Huntsville · 83 Ind. App. 456 - In Re Perry · Holland v. Flinn
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There must be a bona fide existing controversy of a justiciable character to confer upon the court jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief under the declaratory judgment statutes, and if there was no justiciable controversy existing when the suit was commenced the trial court had no jurisdiction.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he declaratory judgment statutes do not empower courts to decide moot questions ... or to give advisory opinions, however convenient it might be to have the questions decided for the government of future cases.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The record before us depicts a case, a trial, and an appeal between a plaintiff and defendant who had no real differences between themselves, but the trial and the appeal were for the accommodation of the institutions which appeared as amici curiae in the trial court and later filed a brief in this court. ".... "`The declaratory judgment statutes do not empower courts to decide moot questions, abstract propositions or to give advisory opinions, however convenient it might be to have the questions decided for the government of future cases.' ... "... [W]hen the only defendant in the case took no position and the statute under consideration stated that the defendant was without power to apply the Act to the institutions involved in the case, there was no longer a justiciable controversy and one has not existed in the instant case since. Under those circumstances, the decree of the trial court was void.... ".... "Since there was no justiciable controversy and only a ` straw man' defendant, the decree of the trial court was void [and] would not support an appeal and the appeal must be dismissed."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.