53 Ala. App. 705 - Gregory v. Hardy’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently October 2007
2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions
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 American Casualty Company of Reading, Pa. v. Devine · Kimbro v. Wells · Flintkote Company v. Grimes · Kelley v. Spencer · Puckett v. Bates
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In the following cases, every agreement is void unless such agreement or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration is in writing and subscribed by the party to be charged therewith or some other person by him thereunto lawfully authorized in writing:”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"The effect of the statute is that any promise to pay the debt of another must be in writing. . . . The courts have developed a method of classifying such promises by categorizing them either as `original' or as `collateral.' If a promise is `original,' it is said to be without the statute, and, if `collateral,' to be within the statute. Various tests have been devised by the courts to aid them in making this determination. "One of the accepted tests of whether the promise is collateral is found in American Casualty Co. of Reading, Pa. v. Devine , 275 Ala. 628 , 157 So.2d 661 , wherein the supreme court said: "'. . . if the transaction be such that the third person is responsible to the person who supplies the articles, the promise of the defendant is collateral, and, if oral, not binding, [citations omitted].' "The case of Puckett v. Bates , 4 Ala. 390 , was cited in Schiffman v. H.L. Raburn Co ., 47 Ala. App. 390 , 255 So.2d 332 , for the statement: "`The law is certainly well established that if the person for whose debt, default or miscarriage the undertaking is made, be liable at all so that the whole responsibility does not rest upon the second promissor, the second promise is collateral, and is void by the statute if not reduced to writing. . . .'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"The principle enunciated by the cited cases is to the effect that if CPC be liable at all for the payment of the legal fees of plaintiffs, then the alleged promise of Gregory to be responsible also for the fees is collateral and, if not in writing, within the statute of frauds. "The evidence overwhelmingly establishes that CPC was liable for plaintiffs' fees and that plaintiffs themselves so considered even after the alleged promise by Gregory. Further, it is without question that Gregory's alleged promise of January 19, 1973, was oral and not in writing; consequently, such a promise is collateral, within the statute of frauds, and hence not binding on Gregory."”
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.