Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 89 So. 2d 83 - Ex Parte Seymore

89 So. 2d 83 - Ex Parte Seymore’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
February 1989
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 1989

14 state decisions

601956196019701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Cooke v. United States · Johnson v. State · Ex parte Dickens · Ex Parte Hill · Ex Parte Bankhead

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

  1. ““ . Again, it is sufficient to point out that we are not considering the trial in the lower court as if it were on appeal here but only because it is before this court on a petition for writ of certiorari. Accordingly, rulings on the evidence are not before us since these rulings do not show error apparent on the record. Ex parte Bankhead, supra [ 200 Ala. 102 , 75 So. 478 ]; Ex parte Dickens, 162 Ala. 272 , 50 So. 218 .” Ex parte Seymore, 264 Ala. 689, 693 , 89 So.2d 83, 87 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Of course due process requires that the accused shall have reasonable opportunity to meet the charges that have been filed against him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “17 Am.Jur.2d, Contempt, § 4. If the act or omission is not done in the presence of the court, but at a distance, it is termed”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.