55 Ala. App. 242 - Lambert v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The evidence establishes that Mary Jones was an agent of West Brothers Corporation, exercising control over the merchandise and responsible for its sale. Appellant contends, however, that since the fishing reels were owned and possessed by West Brothers Corporation, the charge of false pretense cannot be proved by showing that an agent of the Corporation relied upon the misrepresentation. If appellant’s contention is correct, it would be virtually impossible to commit the offense of false pretense against a corporation unless the misrepresentation was made to the president or board of directors. Such is not the law. In Couch v. State, 38 Ala.App. 134 , 78 So.2d 817 (1955), Judge Harwood of the Court of Appeals said: ‘It is well settled that the false pretense, an essential element of the offense charged in this case, may be made to an agent of the person from whom the property is obtained. Bazzell v. State, 16 Ala.App. 663 , 81 So. 183 ; Young v. State, 22 Ala.App. 443 , 116 So. 709 ; Bosworth v. State, 28 Ala.App. 538 , 189 So. 794 .’ “See also: Bailey v. State, 159 Ala. 4 , 48 So. 791 (1909).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rohme v. State