33 Ala. App. 198 - Tidwell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1947
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently October 1981
8 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 24 Ala. App. 254 - Overby v. State · Curtis v. State · 20 Ala. App. 250 - Yarbrough v. State · 20 Ala. App. 221 - McGee 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.
““Thus, purely a question of fact was presented, which the jury resolved adversely to the appellant. This being so, the established principle that one possessing a forged instrument, and applying it to his own use may, in the absence of a satisfactory explanation, be presumed to have fabricated it, or have been privy to its fabrication, fully supports the verdict rendered under the facts presented in this case by the State. Curtis v. State, 118 Ala. 125 , 24 So. 111 ; McGee v. State, 20 Ala.App. 221 , 101 So. 321 ; Overby v. State, 24 Ala.App. 254 , 133 So. 915 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Matthews v. State
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.