In Re Audet’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 2 state decisions

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

1. ““ ‘Due process of law’ means ‘in the duo course of legal proceeding's, according to the rules and forms which have been established for the protection of private rights.’ ‘Due process of law implies the right of the person affected thereby to be present before the tribunal which pronounces judgment upon the question of his life, liberty, or property, and to have the right of controverting every material fact which bears on the question of right in the matter involved.’ One mode of enforcing the decree o-f the court under which the writ of attachment here complained of issued is by process of attachment against the petitioner, the party against whom the decree was rendered. Another mode is by process of sequestration against his property. This was the law when the proceedings in which the decree was rendered were had, and the petitioner knew it. The petitioner was a party to such proceedings, was present in court, had his day, and controverted the right of the complainant in said proceedings to have the decree which was obtained. The court pronounced judgment against petitioner, the effect of which was to involve his property and his liberty; for the statute of Alabama provided that such decree might be enforced by process of * * * sequestration against his property, as well as by execution. If, then, his property is taken or his liberty restrained under this decree, is it not in the due course of legal proceedings, according to those rules and forms which have been establishe”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex parte Merrill

2. ““With full knowledge of the judgment that was maturing against him under the statute and the decree of the court, and that execution would become issuable thereon, the petitioner * * * remained quiescent until he was committed to jail, and then asks for a writ of habeas corpus upon the ground that an execution was issued upon the judgment against him without a hearing. His position is no different from that of any other judgment debtor who might contend that an execution was issued against him without being accorded a hearing as to whether he had already paid the judgment. We see nothing unconstitutional in the act of the General Assembly, * * * nor that petitioner has been in any way deprived of his liberty or property without due process of law.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex parte Merrill