Scrushy v. Tucker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'Under the law of the case doctrine, "[a] party cannot on a second appeal relitigate issues which were resolved by the Court in the first appeal or which would have been resolved had they been properly presented in the first appeal.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 89 So. 3d 768 - Johnson v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc. · 264 So. 3d 841 - Barnwell v. CLP Corp.

2. ““1 “Rule 15(b) is not permissive: it provides that issues tried by express or implied consent shall be treated as if raised in the pleadings.’” Ammons v. Tesker Mfg. Corp., 853 So.2d 210, 216 (Ala.2002) (quoting Hawk v. Bavarian Motor Works, 342 So.2d 355, 358 (Ala. 1977) (emphasis added in Ammons)). See also Rule 54(c), Ala. R. Civ. P. (‘[EJvery final judgment shall grant the relief to which the party in whose favor it is rendered is entitled, even if the party has not demanded such relief in the party’s pleadings.’). “‘It is well settled law in Alabama that implied consent of the parties can be found when an opposing party fails to object to the introduction of evidence raising the disputed issue initially.’ Ho-sca, O. Weaver & Sons, Inc. v. Towner, 663 So.2d 892, 896 (Ala.1995). ‘If a party objects to the introduction of evidence at the trial on the ground that it is not within the issues framed by the pleadings, he must show that he would be actually prejudiced in maintaining his action or defense on the merits by the admission of the evidence.’ Hawk, 342 So.2d at 358 (emphasis added). “‘“[Wjhether pleadings are deemed to be amended in order to conform to the evidence presented is also a matter within the discretion of the trial court,” and a decision in that regard will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.’ International Rehab. As socs., Inc. v. Adams, 613 So.2d 1207, 1214 (Ala.1992) (quoting McCollum v. Reeves, 521 So.2d 13, 16-17 (Ala.1987)). ‘Fail”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 69 So. 3d 885 - Bridges v. Bridges

3. ““ ‘In order to secure a reversal, “the appellant has an affirmative duty of showing error upon the record.” Tucker v. Nichols, 431 So.2d 1263, 1264 (Ala.1983). It is a familiar principle of law: “ ‘ “When an appellant confronts an issue below that the appellee contends warrants a judgment in its favor and the trial court’s order does not specify a basis for its ruling, the omission of any argument on appeal as to that issue in the appellant’s principal brief constitutes a waiver with respect to the issue.” “ ‘Fogarty v. Southworth, 953 So.2d 1225, 1232 (Ala.2006) (footnote omitted) (emphasis added). This waiver, namely, the failure of the appellant to discuss in the opening brief an issue on which the trial court might have relied as a basis for its judgment, results in an affirmance of that judgment. Id. That is so, because “this court will not presume such error on the part of the trial court.” Roberson v. C.P. Allen Constr. Co., 50 So.3d 471, 478 (Ala.Civ.App.2010) (emphasis added). See also Young v. Southern Life & Health Ins. Co., 495 So.2d 601 (Ala.1986)....’ “Soutullo v. Mobile County, 58 So.3d 733, 738-39 (Ala.2010).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 75 So. 3d 660 - Hilda Ruffin v. General Motors Acceptance Corporation.