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.
10 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1851–2018 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Sears Termite & Pest Control v. Robinsongreen2 sentences2007This, we may not do. "`[Section] 43 of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901 mandates the separation of judicial power from legislative power and condemns the usurpation of the power of one branch of government by the other.'" Sears Termite & Pest Control, Inc. v. Robinson, 883 So.2d 153, 157 (Ala. 2003) (quoting Ex parte Thicklin, 824 So.2d 723, 732 (Ala.2002)). "`The authority to declare public policy is reserved to the Legislature, subject to limits imposed by the Constitution.'" Id. (emphasis added). 2007This, we may not do. “ ‘[Section] 43 of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901 mandates the separation of judicial power from legislative power and condemns the usurpation of the power of one branch of government by the other.’ ” Sears Termite & Pest Control, Inc. v. Robinson, 883 So.2d 153, 157 (Ala. 2003) (quoting Ex parte Thicklin, 824 So.2d 723, 732 (Ala.2002)). “ ‘The authority to declare public policy is reserved to the Legislature, subject to limits imposed by the Constitution.’ ” Id. (emphasis added). | 2 | 2 |
Ex Parte Thicklingreen2 sentences2007This, we may not do. “ ‘[Section] 43 of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901 mandates the separation of judicial power from legislative power and condemns the usurpation of the power of one branch of government by the other.’ ” Sears Termite & Pest Control, Inc. v. Robinson, 883 So.2d 153, 157 (Ala. 2003) (quoting Ex parte Thicklin, 824 So.2d 723, 732 (Ala.2002)). “ ‘The authority to declare public policy is reserved to the Legislature, subject to limits imposed by the Constitution.’ ” Id. (emphasis added). 2007This, we may not do. “ ‘[Section] 43 of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901 mandates the separation of judicial power from legislative power and condemns the usurpation of the power of one branch of government by the other.’ ” Sears Termite & Pest Control, Inc. v. Robinson, 883 So.2d 153, 157 (Ala. 2003) (quoting Ex parte Thicklin, 824 So.2d 723, 732 (Ala.2002)). “ ‘The authority to declare public policy is reserved to the Legislature, subject to limits imposed by the Constitution.’ ” Id. (emphasis added). | 2 | 2 |
Hovater v. Hovatergreen1 sentence2001One line of cases holds that "[w]here there is no prior order granting exclusive physical custody to one parent ... the McLendon standard is not applicable ... [and] the `best interests and welfare' of the children standard applies." Hovater v. Hovater, 577 So.2d 461, 464 (Ala.Civ.App.1990) (emphasis added; citing Scott v. Scott, 563 So.2d 1044 (Ala.Civ.App.1990)). | 1 | 1 |
Eubanks v. Eubanksgreen2 sentences1980See, Eubanks v. Eubanks , 52 Ala. App. 224 , 291 So.2d 159 (1974). 1980See, Eubanks v. Eubanks , 52 Ala. App. 224 , 291 So.2d 159 (1974). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte McLendon
green
2 sentences2018"Based on the prior Judgment awarding the Mother sole physical custody of the minor children the standard set out in Ex parte McLendon , 455 So.2d 863 (Ala. 1984), shall apply. 2018"Based on the prior Judgment awarding the Mother sole physical custody of the minor children the standard set out in Ex parte McLendon , 455 So.2d 863 (Ala. 1984), shall apply. | 3 | 2003–2018 |
Scott v. Scott
neutral
2 sentences2001One line of cases holds that "[w]here there is no prior order granting exclusive physical custody to one parent ... the McLendon standard is not applicable ... [and] the `best interests and welfare' of the children standard applies." Hovater v. Hovater, 577 So.2d 461, 464 (Ala.Civ.App.1990) (emphasis added; citing Scott v. Scott, 563 So.2d 1044 (Ala.Civ.App.1990)). 1994Couch; Scott v. Scott , 563 So.2d 1044 (Ala.Civ.App. 1990). | 3 | 1991–2001 |
Eddings v. Long
neutral
1 sentence1851The children claim the whole residue, and their counsel refers us to Bell & Wife v. Hogan, 1 Stew. 536 ; Heirs of Capal v. McMillan, adm’r, 8 Port. 204 ; Eddings et al. v. Long, 10 Ala. 203 , and Bell & Wife v. Mason’s Adm’r, 10 ib. 334, and other authorities, and contends that the parol evidence which was given in the Orphans’ Court, and which consisted of the testator’s declarations that he intended the residue for his children, was admissible to explain an ambiguity in the will, the counsel contending that there is an ambiguity in respect of the word “ legatees.” But the authorities cited b | 1 | 1851–1851 |
Bell v. Hogan
neutral
1 sentence1851The children claim the whole residue, and their counsel refers us to Bell & Wife v. Hogan, 1 Stew. 536 ; Heirs of Capal v. McMillan, adm’r, 8 Port. 204 ; Eddings et al. v. Long, 10 Ala. 203 , and Bell & Wife v. Mason’s Adm’r, 10 ib. 334, and other authorities, and contends that the parol evidence which was given in the Orphans’ Court, and which consisted of the testator’s declarations that he intended the residue for his children, was admissible to explain an ambiguity in the will, the counsel contending that there is an ambiguity in respect of the word “ legatees.” But the authorities cited b | 1 | 1851–1851 |
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.