855 So. 2d 489 - Ex Parte Third Generation, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘[I]t is established by the decisions in this and in Federal jurisdictions that due process of law means notice, a hearing according to that notice, and a judgment entered in accordance with such notice and hearing.’ , “Frahn v. Grey ling Realization Corp., 239 Ala. 580, 583 , 195 So. 758, 761 (1940) (emphasis added [in Neal ]). The rule that a want of due process, so defined, voids a judgment is not redundant with the rule that a want of personal jurisdiction likewise voids a judgment, for a person already effectively made a party to litigation could, on some critical motion or for some critical proceeding within that litigation, be deprived of the ‘notice, a hearing according to that notice, and a judgment entered in accordance with such notice and hearing,’ required by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Frahn, supra. See Winhoven v. United States, 201 F.2d 174 (9th Cir.1952), Bass v. Hoagland, 172 F.2d 205 (5th Cir.1949), Cassioppi [v. Damico, 536 So.2d 938 (Ala.1988) ], and Seventh Wonder [v. Southbound Records, Inc., 364 So.2d 1173 (Ala.1978) ].””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hobbs v. Heisey · Davis v. Davis

2. “"`The standard of review on appeal from the denial of relief under Rule 60(b)(4) [Ala. R. Civ. P.] is not whether there has been an abuse of discretion. When the grant or denial of relief turns on the validity of the judgment, as under Rule 60(b)(4), discretion has no place. If the judgment is valid, it must stand; if it is void, it must be set aside. A judgment is void only if the court that rendered it lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter or of the parties, or if it acted in a manner inconsistent with due process.'"”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 903 So. 2d 828 - Rollins v. Rollins

3. “that in order to be consistent with due process, 'a jury's verdict [must] specifically award either compensatory damages or nominal damages in order for an award of punitive damages to be upheld.' [ Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Smith ,] 719 So.2d [797,] 806 [ (Ala. 1998) ] (citing BMW of North America v. Gore , 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed.2d 809 (1996) ).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Complete Cash Holdings, LLC v. Powell