Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 45 Ala. App. 461 - Cooley v. Cooley

45 Ala. App. 461 - Cooley v. Cooley’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently July 2020

22 state decisions

110197019801990200020102020decided

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 Hodson v. Hodson · Lámar v. Lámar · Lamar v. Lamar · Phillips v. Phillips · Grubb v. Teale

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

  1. ““[W]hen the trial court has before it the entire record and file of the proceedings of what has transpired in the case, and when it has determined that the circumstances justify an allowance of attorneys’ fees, [it] may, in its judicial discretion, allow such fees without proof of reasonableness, but such award is subject to review on appeal.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““We cannot hold that the award of support was excessive or palpably wrong. The amount of such award is within the discretion of the trial court in the light of the surrounding circumstances. Phillips v. Phillips, 277 Ala. 2 , 166 So.2d 726 ; Lee v. Lee, 283 Ala. 275 , 215 So.2d 718 .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The court is presumed to have knowledge, even without evidence, from which it may set such a fee.”
    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.