Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 30 Ala. App. 168 - Waller v. State

30 Ala. App. 168 - Waller v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1940

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
March 1961
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1961

8 state decisions

40194019501960decided

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 Anderson v. State · Cross v. State · Arant v. State · American Ry. Express Co. v. Reid · Brothers v. State

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

  1. ““The judgment of reversal entered by us has been in turn reversed by the Supreme Court; and this case is remanded to us for further consideration in the light of the Supreme Court’s opinion. “Ordinarily, and in accordance with the law that prevails (Code 1923, § 7318, Code 1940, Title 13, § 95), all that would remain would be for us to enter an order affirming the judgment of the Circuit Court — in obedience to the expressed views of the Supreme Court. “But we feel that an error of fact has been committed — for which we may possibly be responsible — and that upon this error the opinion by our Supreme Court has bee.n promulgated. If indeed we are correct in this feeling — ■ and it is our best judgment — we are persuaded that it is our duty to the appellant, to the Supreme Court, and to ourselves, to correct the facts,'so that the Supreme Court cannot misunderstand upon what its holding is based. “To that end we propose to re-state the facts upon which our holding was based — thus giving the Supreme Court an opportunity to correct its holding — ” if it so desires.”
    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.