Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 371 SO2D 23 - Bardin v. Jones

Bardin v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably Liberty Nat. v. Univ. of Ala. Health Servs. (2003), 495 So. 2d 1381 - Harrell v. Reynolds Metals Co. (1986)

24 state decisions

9019791980199020002010decided

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 343 So. 2d 495 - Pruitt v. Pruitt · Hooper v. Huey · Loeb and Co., Inc. v. Martin · Mindler v. Crocker · Reed v. Shipp

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

  1. ““A will, before the probate thereof, may be contested by any person interested therein, or by any person, who, if the testator had died intestate, would have been an heir or distributee of his estate, by filing in the court where it is offered for probate allegations in writing that the will was not duly executed, or of the unsoundness of mind of the testator, or of any other valid objections thereto; and thereupon an issue must be made up, under the direction of the court, between the person making the application, as plaintiff, and the person contesting the validity of the will, as defendant; and such issue must, on application of either party, be tried by a jury.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘The jurisdiction and authority of the circuit court is limited to the trial of the issues presented by the contest after which the case must be certified back to the probate court.’ “[Thigpen v. Walker, 251 Ala. 426, 429 , 37 So.2d 923, 926 (1948).] “From the above-cited authorities it is clear that the probate court prior to transfer could allow additional issues to be presented to it in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure, so long as those issues could properly be raised in a will contest .... In short we now hold that the circuit court following transfer of a will contest to it under § 43-1-78 [now § 43-8-198] can consider any issues presented in an appropriate pleading under the Rules of Civil Procedure, provided those issues can properly be raised in a will contest””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““ ‘Mules 19 and 20, [Ala. R. Civ. P.], which deal with the joinder and alignment of parties, are intended to promote trial convenience, prevent a multiplicity of suits, and expedite the final determination of litigation by inclusion in one suit all parties directly interested in the controversy despite technical objects previously existing in many situations.’ ””
    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.