Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 675 SO2D 886 - Wells v. State

Wells v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 368 So. 2d 864 - Baumler v. Baumler · 382 So. 2d 567 - Livengood v. Sechler

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

  1. “"Under the language of § 15-13-139, Ala. Code 1975, a trial court is given complete discretion to remit all or any portion of a final forfeiture judgment. We note that it is the duty of a reviewing court to presume that the trial court properly exercised its discretion when a question of its discretion is raised on appeal. Baumler v. Baumler , 368 So.2d 864 (Ala. Civ. App. 1979). This court will not revise a trial court's exercise of its discretion unless it determines from the evidence that the trial court plainly and palpably erred. Livengood v. Sechler , 382 So.2d 567 (Ala. Civ. App. 1980)."”
    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.