Ex Parte Jefferson County’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Section 6-6-227 provides that when the constitutionality of a state statute is challenged the attorney general must be served with a copy of the complaint, in order to allow him to represent the interests of the people of the State of Alabama. See Board of Trustees of Employees' Retirement System of the City of Montgomery v. Talley , 291 Ala. 307 , 280 So.2d 553 (1973). In interpreting § 6-6-227 , this Court has consistently held that the failure to serve the attorney general will deny the trial court jurisdiction to resolve any claim based on the constitutional challenge. See Bratton v. City of Florence , 688 So.2d 233 , 234 (Ala. 1996). Any ruling that a trial court makes on a constitutional issue, when the attorney general has not been given notice and the opportunity to *Page 867 intervene, is void. See Ex parte St. Vincent's Hosp. , 652 So.2d 225 (Ala. 1994); Fairhope Single Tax Corp. v. Rezner , 527 So.2d 1232 (Ala. 1987). See, also, Busch Jewelry Co. v. City of Bessemer , 266 Ala. 492 , 493 , 98 So.2d 50 , 51 (1957)."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bowdoin v. State