Smith v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"`Pursuant to Rule 58(c), Ala. R. Civ. P., "[n]otation of a judgment or order on separately maintained bench notes or in the civil docket or the filing of a separate judgment or order constitutes the entry of the judgment or order." "Rule 58 . . . obliterate[s] any distinction between [the ministerial act of] entry and [the judicial act] of rendition of judgment and . . . make[s] the operative event the act of the judge." 2 Champ Lyons, Jr., Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure Annotated , § 58.2, at 255 (3d ed. 1996). However, when a judge renders a judgment by a separate written order, that judgment is not entered until it is filed in the clerk's office. See Lacks *Page 833 v. Stribling , 406 So.2d 926 , 930 (Ala.Civ.App.), cert. denied , 406 So.2d 932 (Ala. 1981). Thus, although under Rule 58(c), rendition and entry of judgment occur simultaneously when the trial judge notes the judgment on the case action summary sheet or on separately maintained bench notes, see Rule 58, Ala. R. Civ. P., Committee Comments on 1973 Adoption, the Rule nevertheless preserves the distinction between rendition and entry of judgment when the trial judge renders judgment "by executing a separate written document," Rule 58(a), Ala. R. Civ. P.'"”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. ALLSTATE INS., COMPANY v. Coastal Yacht Services, Inc. · Doe v. Markham

2. “"Under Alabama law, the trial judge must `evaluat[e] the evidence and explanations presented' and `determine whether the explanations are sufficient to overcome the presumption of bias.' Branch , 526 So.2d at 624 . `The trial judge cannot merely accept the specific reasons given . . . at face value; the judge must consider whether the facially neutral explanations are contrived to avoid admitting the acts of group discrimination.' Id ."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sharp v. State · Oblander v. Usaa Casualty Ins. Co.

3. “`removal of even one juror for a racially discriminatory reason is a violation of the equal protection rights of both the excluded juror and the party challenging the peremptory strike.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Oblander v. Usaa Casualty Ins. Co. · 792 So. 2d 1045 - PRUDENTIAL BALLARD REALTY CO. INC. v. Weatherly