48 Ala. App. 396 - Paul v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

35 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““‘ADMISSION OF NON-RESIDENT ATTORNEYS PRO HAC VICE “ ‘Any Member of the Bar of another State or jurisdiction, actually engaged in any cause or matter pending in any Court of this State, may be permitted by such Court to appear in and conduct such cause or matter while retaining his residence in another State without being subject generally to the rules regarding admission to the Bar of this State, provided that he first be introduced and recommended to such Court by a member of the Board of Commissioners of the Alabama State Bar, such introduction and recommendation to be either in person or by a written communication, otherwise such attorney may riot appear as an attorney in any Court of this State.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 56 Ala. App. 577 - Yancey v. State

2. ““Where, as here, the evidence is both direct and in part circumstantial, there is no error in refusing the above charges [which included charge 6] as such would tend to mislead the jury by placing undue emphasis upon the circumstantial evidence. McCoy v. State, 170 Ala. 10 , 54 So. 428 . Since in this case the evidence was not wholly circumstantial, the refusal of the above charges was not error. Duke v. State, 257 Ala. 339 , 58 So.2d 764 ; Gordon v. State, 147 Ala. 42 , 41 So. 847 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 354 So. 2d 1134 - Thompson v. State