Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 527 SO2D 1292 - Ex Parte Coots

Ex Parte Coots’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
2
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Savoie v. Lafourche Boat Rentals, Inc. · United States v. International Business Machines Corp. · Rosenthal v. Peoples Cab Co. · Gill v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.

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

  1. “deposition and one that could be used as substantive evidence at trial. Specifically, the defendant doctor contended that the plaintiffs did not give notice or otherwise advise him of their intention to question the expert *Page 452 witness at his deposition to obtain information for use as evidence at trial. Although the issue in Coots is not identical to the present one, the defendant's argument in Coots of lack of notice regarding the use of a deposition is analogous to Dr. Kent's argument. Rule 32(a)(3), A.R.Civ.P., provides that”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he deposition of a witness, whether or not a party, may be used by any party for any purpose if the court finds: . . . (D) that the witness is a licensed physician or dentist.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “in violation of both the letter and the spirit of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure.”
    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.