Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 438 SO2D 766 - Ex Parte Smith

Ex Parte Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

108
cited by 108 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 107 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 108 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Liberty Nat. v. Univ. of Ala. Health Servs. (2003), Stamps v. Jefferson County Bd. of Educ. (1994)

1 federal appellate · 107 state decisions

5001983199020002010decided

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 Craig v. Root · City of Huntsville v. Miller · Hooper v. Huey · State v. Pollock · 423 So. 2d 231 - Payne v. Department of Industrial Relations

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

  1. “Lack of subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived by the parties and it is the duty of an appellate court to consider lack of subject matter jurisdiction ex mero motu .”
    23 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““If a case filed in ... the district court is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the circuit court, ... a judge of the court where the case was filed shall transfer the case to the docket of the appropriate court....””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““Section 12-11-9, Code 1975, provides in pertinent part: “ ‘If a case filed in ... the district court is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the circuit court, the circuit clerk or a judge of the court where the case was filed shall transfer the case to the docket of the appropriate court_’ (Emphasis added.) “After testimony in the district court revealed that the amount in controversy undisputedly exceeded the district court’s $5,000 jurisdictional limit, under the provisions of § 12-11-9, the district judge should have transferred rather than dismissed the case.””
    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.