Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 31 Ala. App. 351 - Espey v. State

31 Ala. App. 351 - Espey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1944

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
October 1968
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently October 1968

12 state decisions

80194419501960decided

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 Cross v. State · Griffith v. State · Sanders v. State · Underwood v. State · Cunningham 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Moreover, under the rule of idem sonans, declared in Underwood v. State, 72 Ala. 220, 222 , the trial court must be sustained in the ruling. Whether one name is idem sonans with another, notwithstanding a difference in the spelling of the two, is a question of fact for the determination of the jury, when it arises on the evidence under the plea of the general issue, and not a matter of law for the decision of the court. Therefore, ‘the motion to exclude the evidence, and the instruction requested, were but efforts to withdraw the inquiry from the consideration of the jury, and were properly overruled.’ Underwood v. State, 72 Ala. at page 222 .””
    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.