437 So. 2d 1267 - Conley v. Beaver’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently June 2005
1 federal appellate · 17 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 Johnson v. State · Crowson v. Cody · Gulf American Fire and Casualty Co. v. Johnson · Irwin v. Alabama Fuel & Iron Co. · Southern Railway Company v. McCamy
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Collateral estoppel operates where the subsequent suit between the same parties is not on the same cause of action. Requirements for collateral estoppel to operate are: (1) issue identical to one involved in previous suit; (2) issue actually litigated in prior action; and (3) resolution of the issue was necessary to the prior judgment. . . . If these elements are present, the prior judgment is conclusive as to those issues actually determined in the prior suit. Gulf American Fire Casualty [Co.] v. Johnson , 282 Ala. 73 , 209 So.2d 212 (1968)."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"In the absence of fraud, a release supported by a valuable consideration, unambiguous in meaning, will be given effect according to the intention of the parties to be judged from what appears within the four corners of the instrument itself and parol evidence is not admissible to impeach it or vary its terms. Miles v. Barrett , [ 223 Ala. 293 , 134 So. 661 (1931)]."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The issue in the prior case was whether the release was a bar to recovery. This same issue is presented in appellants' petition for reformation. The issue decided in the prior case was clearly necessary and that issue was actually litigated and determined by the trial court. . . ."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.