52 Ala. App. 668 - Mathis v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
42
cited by 42 later decisions
1
states following
December 1989
most recently cited
42 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Sheppard v. Maxwell · Lawrence Metze v. New York · 68 Cal. 2d 375 - Maine v. Superior Court · Williams v. Dutton · Mathis v. State
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““August 17, 1969, a hurricane came ashore in Mobile County. The Board of School Commissioners awarded a cost plus contract for school repairs to Mathis without public bidding. “According to the tendencies of the State’s evidence, Mathis, with (or at the instigation of) an employee of the Board submitted false invoices from subcontractors. It was inferable that Mathis and this employee advised certain subcontractors and materialmen who had either done little or no work on particular schools, to inflate their bills and kick back to Mathis and his accomplice. In at least one instance they got blank invoice forms of a subcontractor, filled them out, and ran them through the Board’s fiscal machinery to their profit. “Mathis defended, essentially, on a lack of scienter. He was then being harassed by creditors in other undertakings. This financial distraction, he said, kept him from realizing that he was participating in a fraudulent scheme. Mathis claimed, for example, that he thought that he was giving a year’s maintenance guaranty on the roofs of the schools involved. “The State, in rebuttal, countered the thrust of Mathis’s testimony by producing the putative accomplice who testified that Mathis participated in the decision to make false invoices and send them to the Board as bills. “This witness . . . testified without objection that the change from billing for damaged schools to also billing for schools not damaged was prompted by greed, ‘ . . . partly mine and partly Mr. Math”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mathis v. State“The law focuses on the impartiality of the trial jury.”
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.