Buffington v. Swindall’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 467 So. 2d 964 - Rudd v. Rudd · 511 So. 2d 190 - Potter v. STATE, DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES · 708 So. 2d 142 - Ex Parte Caterpillar, Inc. · 710 So. 2d 454 - Nichols v. Ingram Plumbing
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.
“"Although neither party has raised any issue regarding the timeliness of the appeal, we note that jurisdictional issues are of such significance that an appellate court may take notice of them at any time, ex mero motu. Nichols v. Ingram Plumbing, 710 So.2d 454 (Ala.Civ.App. 1998). `The timely filing of a notice of appeal is a jurisdictional act.' Rudd v. Rudd, 467 So.2d 964, 965 (Ala.Civ.App. 1985); see also Potter v. State, Dep't of Human Resources, 511 So.2d 190 (Ala. Civ.App.1986)."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.