971 So. 2d 23 - Friedman v. Friedman’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

cited by 17 later decisions

states following

August 2017

most recently cited

17 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 676 So. 2d 1322 - Ex Parte Bryowsky · 486 So. 2d 408 - Hall v. Mazzone · 675 So. 2d 377 - Allstate Ins. Co. v. Skelton · 778 So. 2d 791 - Reed v. BD. OF TRUSTEES FOR AL. STATE UNIV. · 636 So. 2d 415 - Ex Parte Board of Zoning Adjustment

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

““ ‘ “ ‘ “Appellate courts do not sit in judgment of disputed evidence that was presented ore tenus before the trial court....”’ Ex parte Roberts, 796 So.2d 349, 351 (Ala.2001) (quoting Ex parte Bryowsky, 676 So.2d 1322, 1324 (Ala.1996)). ‘When the evidence in a case is in conflict, the trier of fact has to resolve the conflicts in the testimony, and it is not within the province of the appellate court to reweigh the testimony and substitute its own judgment for that of the trier of fact.’ Delbridge v. Civil Serv. Bd. of Tuscaloosa, 481 So.2d 911, 913 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). ‘[A]n appellate court may not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court. To do so would be to reweigh the evidence, which Alabama law does not allow.’ Ex parte Foley, 864 So.2d 1094, 1099 (Ala.2003) (citations omitted).” ’ “Friedman v. Friedman, 971 So.2d 23, 28 (Ala.2007) (quoting Ex parte R.E.C., 899 So.2d 272, 279 (Ala.2004)).””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Hardy Corp. v. Rayco Industrial, Inc. · Curry v. Russell County Board of Education
“whether the dispute is based entirely upon oral testimony or upon a combination of oral testimony and documentary evidence.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Holland v. Holland · 990 So. 2d 383 - Clements v. Clements
“The appellate courts do not sit in judgment of the facts, and [they] review the factfinder's determination of facts only to the extent of determining whether it is sufficiently supported by the evidence, that question being one of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 992 So. 2d 34 - J.B. v. Cleburne County Dhr

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.