984 So. 2d 1216 - Decker v. Decker’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently October 2021 · most notably 3 So. 3d 922 - Butler v. Phillips (2008), Giardina v. Giardina (2009)
38 state decisions
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 Heaston v. Nabors · 892 So. 2d 395 - McMurphy v. East Bay Clothiers · 835 So. 2d 1032 - Johnson v. Johnson · 907 So. 2d 447 - Wilcoxen v. Wilcoxen · Opinion by the Clerk
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“" 'Even though the issue has not been addressed by either party, this court must first determine whether it has jurisdiction over this appeal. "Jurisdictional matters are of such importance that a court may take notice of them ex mero motu ." McMurphy v. East Bay Clothiers , 892 So.2d 395 , 397 (Ala. Civ. App. 2004). "[T]he question whether a judgment is final is a jurisdictional question." Johnson v. Johnson , 835 So.2d 1032 , 1034 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002). "A final judgment is one that disposes of all the claims and controversies between the parties." Heaston v. Nabors , 889 So.2d 588 , 590 (Ala. Civ. App. 2004).' "”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he question whether a judgment is final is a jurisdictional question.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ac v. Cc · Bray v. Bray““The parties were divorced by a judgment of the DeKalb Circuit Court on February 7, 2003. The divorce judgment provided, among other things, that the former husband pay the former wife $3,500 per month as periodic alimony and maintain a $500,000 life-insurance policy on his life naming the former wife as the beneficiary. On August 27, 2004, the former husband filed a petition stating, in pertinent part: “‘(3) Since the entry of the Final Judgment there has been a material change in circumstances which warrants a reduction in [the former husband’s] alimony obligation. “ ‘(4) The Final Judgment ordered [the former husband] to maintain $500,000.00 of insurance on his life naming [the former wife] as beneficiary. “‘(5) Since the entry of the Final Judgment there has been a material change in circumstances which warrants termination of the insurance policy. “ ‘(6) Pursuant to paragraph seven (7) of the Final Judgment, [the former husband] was awarded various items of personal property from the marital home. [The former wife] has failed or refused to allow [the former husband] to take possession of said items or disposed [of] or destroyed the same. [The former husband] would request that this Court enter a judgment in his favor and against [the former wife] for the value of the items. “ ‘(7) Pursuant to the Final Judgment, [the former husband] was awarded the marital residence. [The former wife] failed to vacate the marital property as ordered by this Court. Further, [the former wi”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Decker v. Decker
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.