72 So. 3d 1250 - Ex Parte Sp’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
October 2014
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Property at 2018 Rainbow Drive · 554 So. 2d 406 - Ex Parte Presse · 514 So. 2d 845 - Ex Parte Adams · L.L.M. v. S.F. · Cadle Co. v. Shabani
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘ “A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy ... that should be granted only if the trial court clearly abused its discretion by acting in an arbitrary or capricious manner.” Ex parte Edwards, 727 So.2d 792, 794 (Ala.1998). The petitioner must demonstrate: “ ‘ “ ‘(1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (8) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.’ ” “ ‘Ex parte Edwards, 727 So.2d at 794 (quoting Ex parte Adams, 514 So.2d 845, 850 (Ala.1987)).’ “Ex parte D.J.B., 859 So.2d 445, 448 (Ala.Civ.App.2003).””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““Alabama courts have long held that an evidentiary hearing on the merits of a dependency petition is required in order for a juvenile court to declare a child to be dependent. See Ex parte Linnell, 484 So.2d 455, 457 (Ala.1986) (construing former Ala.Code 1975, § 12-15-65(d), the predecessor statute to Ala.Code 1975, § 12-15-310(a) & (b)); K.C.G. v. S.J.R., 46 So.3d 499, 501 (Ala.Civ.App.2010); and Ex parte W.H., 941 So.2d 290 (Ala.Civ.App.2006) (construing former § 12 — 15—65(d)). The Aabama Juvenile Justice Act ... did not alter this requirement. In fact, § 12-15-310(a) explains that an ‘adjudicatory hearing’ is a hearing at which evidence is presented in support of a dependency petition, and § 12-15-310(b) states that the juvenile court should hear evidence on the petition if the parties dispute the allegations in the petition or if they fail to respond to the petition.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. H.W.R. v. J.C.
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.