786 So. 2d 477 - Williams v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

cited by 11 later decisions

states following

December 2013

most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 539 So. 2d 218 - Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby · Diversicare Corp. v. Nickerson · 738 So. 2d 824 - Delchamps, Inc. v. Bryant · 431 So. 2d 515 - Purcell Co., Inc. v. Spriggs Enterprises, Inc. · 379 So. 2d 590 - Hill v. Cherry

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.

“`The jury's verdict is presumed to be correct, and that presumption is strengthened by the trial court's denial of the motion for a new trial.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Chandler v. State · 832 So. 2d 1 - Acceptance Ins. Co. v. Brown
“"The standard of review applicable to a ruling on a motion for [a JML] is identical to the standard used by the trial court in granting or denying [that motion]. Thus, in reviewing the trial court's ruling on the motion, we review the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmovant, and we determine whether the party with the burden of proof has produced sufficient evidence to require a jury determination. ".... "... In ruling on a motion for a [JML], the trial court is called upon to determine whether the evidence was sufficient to submit a question of fact to the jury; for the court to determine that it was, there must have been `substantial evidence' before the jury to create a question of fact. `[S]ubstantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.'"”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 832 So. 2d 1 - Acceptance Ins. Co. v. Brown · 986 So. 2d 1093 - Exxon Mobil Corp. v. ALA. DEPT. OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
“"The denial of a motion for a new trial is within the sound discretion of the trial court. Williams v. Williams, 786 So.2d 477, 479 (Ala.2000) (citing Hill v. Cherry, 379 So.2d 590 (Ala.1980))."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 849 So. 2d 951 - Wood v. Phillips · 847 So. 2d 908 - Hornady Truck Line, Inc. v. Meadows

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.