Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
18 Alabama opinions name it 3 courts 1989–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Old v. Jcgreen2 sentences2024See also O.L.D. v. J.C., 769 So. 2d at 302 ("In the interest of judicial economy and because the record supports a finding of dependency, we will not remand this case to the 15 CL-2023-0286 and CL-2023-0287 trial court for a dependency hearing."). 2024See also O.L.D. v. J.C., 769 So. 2d at 302 ("In the interest of judicial economy and because the record supports a finding of dependency, we will not remand this case to the 15 CL-2023-0286 and CL-2023-0287 trial court for a dependency hearing."). | 2 | 2 |
Goree v. Shirleygreen2 sentences2011See Goree v. Shirley, 765 So.2d 661, 662 (Ala.Civ.App. 2000) (it was the responsibility of mother, as the appellant, to include sufficient information in record to warrant a reversal); and State ex rel. 2011See Goree v. Shirley, 765 So.2d 661, 662 (Ala.Civ.App.2000) (it was the responsibility of mother, as the appellant, to include sufficient information in record to warrant a reversal); and State ex rel. | 2 | 2 |
M.T.D. v. Morgan County Department of Human Resourcesgreen1 sentence2016In M.T.D. v. Morgan County Department of Human Resources, 53 So.3d 966, 968 (Ala.Civ.App.2010), this court determined that the father in that case had failed to demonstrate that his due-process rights had been denied or violated when he did not move to attend the dependency hearing, he did not file a motion in the trial court seeking to submit his testimony by way of deposition, and he did not actually submit evidence by way of deposition during the dependency hearing. | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte L.E.O.green2 sentences2012Those undisputed facts show that, at the time of the dependency hearing, the child fit firmly within the definition of a “dependent child” as a child “[wjhose parent ... has abandoned the child, as defined in subdivision (1) of Section 12-15-301,” § 12-15-102(8)a.5., and who was not “receiving adequate care and supervision from those persons legally obligated to care for and/or to supervise the child.” Ex parte L.E.O., 61 So.3d at 1047 (emphasis omitted). 2012In Ex parte L.E.O., 61 So.3d 1042 (Ala.2010), our supreme court determined that a child that has been abandoned by his or her parents is “in need of care or supervision,” and therefore dependent, when the child is not “receiving adequate care and supervision from, those persons legally obligated to care for and/or to supervise the child.” 61 So.3d at 1047 . | 1 | 1 |
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Goodmangreen2 sentences2008It is well settled that "an appellate court is limited to a review of the record, and the record cannot be changed, altered, or varied on appeal by statements in briefs of counsel." Quick v. Burton , 960 So.2d 678 , 680-81 (Ala.Civ.App. 2006) (citing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Goodman , 789 So.2d 166 , 176 (Ala. 2000), and Gotlieb v. Collat , 567 So.2d 1302 , 1304 (Ala. 1990)). 2008It is well settled that "an appellate court is limited to a review of the record, and the record cannot be changed, altered, or varied on appeal by statements in briefs of counsel." Quick v. Burton, 960 So.2d 678, 680-81 (Ala.Civ.App.2006)(citing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Goodman, 789 So.2d 166, 176 (Ala.2000), and Gotlieb v. Collat, 567 So.2d 1302, 1304 (Ala.1990)). | 1 | 1 |
Gotlieb v. Collatgreen2 sentences2008It is well settled that "an appellate court is limited to a review of the record, and the record cannot be changed, altered, or varied on appeal by statements in briefs of counsel." Quick v. Burton , 960 So.2d 678 , 680-81 (Ala.Civ.App. 2006) (citing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Goodman , 789 So.2d 166 , 176 (Ala. 2000), and Gotlieb v. Collat , 567 So.2d 1302 , 1304 (Ala. 1990)). 2008It is well settled that "an appellate court is limited to a review of the record, and the record cannot be changed, altered, or varied on appeal by statements in briefs of counsel." Quick v. Burton, 960 So.2d 678, 680-81 (Ala.Civ.App.2006)(citing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Goodman, 789 So.2d 166, 176 (Ala.2000), and Gotlieb v. Collat, 567 So.2d 1302, 1304 (Ala.1990)). | 1 | 1 |
Quick v. Burtongreen2 sentences2008It is well settled that "an appellate court is limited to a review of the record, and the record cannot be changed, altered, or varied on appeal by statements in briefs of counsel." Quick v. Burton , 960 So.2d 678 , 680-81 (Ala.Civ.App. 2006) (citing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Goodman , 789 So.2d 166 , 176 (Ala. 2000), and Gotlieb v. Collat , 567 So.2d 1302 , 1304 (Ala. 1990)). 2008It is well settled that "an appellate court is limited to a review of the record, and the record cannot be changed, altered, or varied on appeal by statements in briefs of counsel." Quick v. Burton, 960 So.2d 678, 680-81 (Ala.Civ.App.2006)(citing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Goodman, 789 So.2d 166, 176 (Ala.2000), and Gotlieb v. Collat, 567 So.2d 1302, 1304 (Ala.1990)). | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Beasleygreen2 sentences2007The supreme court held that the dependency requirement applied in cases in which a nonparent seeks termination but that the CPA does not require a parent seeking to terminate the rights of the other parent to prove dependency. 564 So.2d at 954 . *1189 Recognizing that the CPA did not expressly require a finding of dependency, the supreme court noted that the two-pronged test was drawn, in part, "from ง 12-15-1 et seq. ('the Juvenile Act') and Rule 25, [Ala.] R. 2007Ex parte Beasley, 564 So.2d 950 (Ala.1990). | 1 | 1 |
Smoke v. STATE, DEPT. OF PENSIONS AND SECURITYgreen1 sentence2006Absent an informed waiver of his rights under the statute, the failure of the trial court to inform him of those rights as required by §§ 12-15-63(b), 65(b) was error requiring reversal of the trial court’s order.” 378 So.2d at 1150 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Matter of W.T.Cgreen1 sentence1998In In the Matter of W.T.C., a minor, 675 So.2d 470, 471-72 (Ala.Civ.App.1996), this court stated the following: “After reviewing the record and the applicable statute [§ 12-15-90], we conclude that the trial court erred in vesting custody of the child in the Department after the probable cause hearing.... | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Carter v. JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT. OF PENSIONS AND SECURITY
green
2 sentences2018Carter v. Jefferson County Department of Pensions & Security , 496 So.2d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 1986). 2018Carter v. Jefferson County Department of Pensions & Security , 496 So.2d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 1986). | 2 | 2018–2018 |
J.L. v. W.E.
green
2 sentences2018Therefore, our decision in this case is not in conflict with our decisions of the appeals in J.L. , supra , M.P.G. , supra , or T.W. , supra . 6 In this case, the juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the action; however, because the child has a custodial parent able to properly care for and supervise him, the child is not a dependent child. 2018Therefore, our decision in this case is not in conflict with our decisions of the appeals in J.L. , supra , M.P.G. , supra , or T.W. , supra . 6 In this case, the juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the action; however, because the child has a custodial parent able to properly care for and supervise him, the child is not a dependent child. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
T.W. v. Madison County Department of Human Resources
green
2 sentences2018Therefore, our decision in this case is not in conflict with our decisions of the appeals in J.L. , supra , M.P.G. , supra , or T.W. , supra . 6 In this case, the juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the action; however, because the child has a custodial parent able to properly care for and supervise him, the child is not a dependent child. 2018Therefore, our decision in this case is not in conflict with our decisions of the appeals in J.L. , supra , M.P.G. , supra , or T.W. , supra . 6 In this case, the juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the action; however, because the child has a custodial parent able to properly care for and supervise him, the child is not a dependent child. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
M.P.G. v. Jefferson County Department of Human Resources
green
2 sentences2018Therefore, our decision in this case is not in conflict with our decisions of the appeals in J.L. , supra , M.P.G. , supra , or T.W. , supra . 6 In this case, the juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the action; however, because the child has a custodial parent able to properly care for and supervise him, the child is not a dependent child. 2018Therefore, our decision in this case is not in conflict with our decisions of the appeals in J.L. , supra , M.P.G. , supra , or T.W. , supra . 6 In this case, the juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the action; however, because the child has a custodial parent able to properly care for and supervise him, the child is not a dependent child. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
LIMESTONE CTY. DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES v. McAllister
green
2 sentences1989The Court of Civil Appeals reversed and remanded, holding that the testimony of both witnesses had been improperly excluded, 541 So.2d 1099 . 1989The Court of Civil Appeals reversed and remanded, holding that the testimony of both witnesses had been improperly excluded, 541 So.2d 1099 . | 2 | 1989–1989 |
Ex Parte State Dept. of Human Resources
green
1 sentence2014Ex parte State Dep’t of Human Res., 890 So.2d 114 (Ala. 2004). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
T.W.W. v. Lauderdale County Dhr
green
1 sentence2003This child hearsay exception applies to all hearings involving dependency including, but not limited to, the 72-hour hearing, the dependency hearing, and the disposition hearing. " (Emphasis added.) In T.W.W. v. Lauderdale County Department of Human Resources , 628 So.2d 761 (Ala.Civ.App. 1993), this court assumed without deciding that § 12-15-65(g), Ala. Code 1975 (the predecessor to § 12-15-65(i)), was applicable in a parental-rights-termination proceeding. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Cantrell v. State
green
2 sentences1991In Cantrell v. State , 353 So.2d 80 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977), this court stated that it is "the general rule that a defendant who voluntarily takes the witness stand in his own behalf and testifies without asserting his privilege against self incrimination waives the privilege as to the testimony given and such testimony may be used against the defendant in a subsequent trial for the same offense even if he does not take the stand at the second trial." Cantrell , 353 So.2d at 82 . 1991In Cantrell v. State , 353 So.2d 80 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977), this court stated that it is "the general rule that a defendant who voluntarily takes the witness stand in his own behalf and testifies without asserting his privilege against self incrimination waives the privilege as to the testimony given and such testimony may be used against the defendant in a subsequent trial for the same offense even if he does not take the stand at the second trial." Cantrell , 353 So.2d at 82 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Lavett v. Lavett
red
1 sentence1989Lavett v. Lavett , 414 So.2d 907 (Ala. 1982). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.