followed rule in Alabama

10 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1909–1990 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.

Followed or applied (1)

Case	Followed	Cited
Southern Ry. Co. v. Dicksongreen ala · 1924 · cited in 2 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1975–1990 2 sentences 1990In Griffin Lumber , this Court followed the rule as laid down in the case of Southern Ry. v. Dickson , 211 Ala. 481 , 100 So. 665 , 669 (1924), as follows: " ' "Proof which goes no further than to show an injury could have occurred in an alleged way, does not warrant the conclusion that it did so occur, where from the same proof the injury can with equal probability be attributed to some other cause." " 'But a nice discrimination must be exercised in the application of this principle. 1990In Griffin Lumber , this Court followed the rule as laid down in the case of Southern Ry. v. Dickson , 211 Ala. 481 , 100 So. 665 , 669 (1924), as follows: " ' "Proof which goes no further than to show an injury could have occurred in an alleged way, does not warrant the conclusion that it did so occur, where from the same proof the injury can with equal probability be attributed to some other cause." " 'But a nice discrimination must be exercised in the application of this principle.	2	2

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (16)

Case	Cited	Years
United States v. Charles A. Harrington green ca2 · 1973 1 sentence 1980On appeal, this court followed the analysis adopted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in United States v. Bowers , 567 F.2d 1309 (5th Cir. 1978) which was originally set forth in United States v. Harrington , 490 F.2d 487 (2nd Cir. 1973).	1	1980–1980
United States v. Tracy Melvin Bowers green ca5 · 1978 1 sentence 1980On appeal, this court followed the analysis adopted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in United States v. Bowers , 567 F.2d 1309 (5th Cir. 1978) which was originally set forth in United States v. Harrington , 490 F.2d 487 (2nd Cir. 1973).	1	1980–1980
Francis v. Sheats neutral ala · 1907 2 sentences 1978The Court followed the rule of Francis v. Sheats, 153 Ala. 468 , 45 So. 241 (1907) and held that, under the then existing redemp tion statute, the seasonable exercise of the right of redemption by a third mortgagee operated to invest such redeeming mortgagee with the indefeasible legal title to the land as against all intervening mortgagees. 1978The Court followed the rule of Francis v. Sheats, 153 Ala. 468 , 45 So. 241 (1907) and held that, under the then existing redemp tion statute, the seasonable exercise of the right of redemption by a third mortgagee operated to invest such redeeming mortgagee with the indefeasible legal title to the land as against all intervening mortgagees.	1	1978–1978
Kirby v. State green ala · 1889 2 sentences 1974In Duke v. State, 257 Ala. 339 , 58 So. 764 (1952) this court followed the rule established in Kirby v. State, 89 Ala. 63 , 8 So. 110 , (1889) where the court stated: "`Affinity properly means the tie which arises from marriage betwixt the husband and the blood relatives of the wife, and between the wife and the blood relatives of the husband. 1974In Duke v. State, 257 Ala. 339 , 58 So. 764 (1952) this court followed the rule established in Kirby v. State, 89 Ala. 63 , 8 So. 110 , (1889) where the court stated: “ ‘Affinity properly means the tie which arises from marriage betwixt the husband and the blood relatives of the wife, and between the wife and the blood relatives of the husband.	1	1974–1974
Duke v. State green ala · 1952 2 sentences 1974In Duke v. State, 257 Ala. 339 , 58 So. 764 (1952) this court followed the rule established in Kirby v. State, 89 Ala. 63 , 8 So. 110 , (1889) where the court stated: "`Affinity properly means the tie which arises from marriage betwixt the husband and the blood relatives of the wife, and between the wife and the blood relatives of the husband. 1974In Duke v. State, 257 Ala. 339 , 58 So. 764 (1952) this court followed the rule established in Kirby v. State, 89 Ala. 63 , 8 So. 110 , (1889) where the court stated: “ ‘Affinity properly means the tie which arises from marriage betwixt the husband and the blood relatives of the wife, and between the wife and the blood relatives of the husband.	1	1974–1974
Dickson v. Van Hoose green ala · 1908 2 sentences 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719. 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719.	1	1968–1968
Wright v. Smith neutral ala · 1952 2 sentences 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719. 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719.	1	1968–1968
Hanners v. Hanners green ala · 1955 2 sentences 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719. 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719.	1	1968–1968
Johnson v. Harrison neutral ala · 1961 2 sentences 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719. 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719.	1	1968–1968
Ex Parte Jefferson Slag Co. neutral ala · 1923 2 sentences 1968“In the instant case, therefore, the two disabilities being concurrent, the allowance of 32 weeks for temporary total disability should be deducted from the allowance of 80 weeks for permanent 629 partial disability, thereby reducing the allowance for the latter to 48 weeks; * » In 1923, this court followed this rule in Ex parte Jefferson Slag Co., 209 Ala. 263 , 96 So. 138 . 1968“In the instant case, therefore, the two disabilities being concurrent, the allowance of 32 weeks for temporary total disability should be deducted from the allowance of 80 weeks for permanent 629 partial disability, thereby reducing the allowance for the latter to 48 weeks; * * *» In 1923, this court followed this rule in Ex parte Jefferson Slag Co., 209 Ala. 263 , 96 So. 138 .	1	1968–1968
Galloway Coal Co. v. Stanford green ala · 1926 2 sentences 1968In 1926, after the act had been codified in the 1923 Code, this court reexamined the question in Galloway Coal Co. v. Stanford, 215 Ala. 79 , 109 So. 377 , and in a four to three decision, followed the two prior decisions. 1968In 1926, after the act had been codified in the 1923 Code, this court reexamined the question in Galloway Coal Co. v. Stanford, 215 Ala. 79 , 109 So. 377 , and in a four to three decision, followed the two prior decisions.	1	1968–1968
Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile green ala · 1954 2 sentences 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719. 1968Wright v. Smith, 257 Ala. 665 , 60 So.2d 688 ; Patterson v. First National Bank of Mobile, 261 Ala. 601 , 75 So.2d 471 ; Hanners v. Hanners, 262 Ala. 143 , 77 So.2d 484 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 272 Ala. 210 , 130 So.2d 35 ; Dickson v. Van Hoose, 157 Ala. 459 , 47 So. 718 , 19 L.R.A.,N.S., 719.	1	1968–1968
Green v. Smith neutral ala · 1930 2 sentences 1950In Copeland v. Dabbs, supra, decided in 1930, a majority of the court held that the instrument put in evidence and upon which the complainant's right to recover depended, "showed a valid deed, provable, though not self-proving." [ 221 Ala. 489 , 129 So. 92 ] An acknowledgment of one of the grantors had been taken before an Arkansas notary public. 1950In Copeland v. Dabbs, supra, decided in 1930, a majority of the court held that the instrument put in evidence and upon which the complainant’s right to recover depended, “showed a valid deed, provable, though not self-proving.” [ 221 Ala. 489 , 129 So. 92 ] An acknowledgment of one of the grantors had been taken before an Arkansas notary public.	1	1950–1950
Copeland v. Dabbs neutral ala · 1930 2 sentences 1950In Copeland v. Dabbs, supra, decided in 1930, a majority of the court held that the instrument put in evidence and upon which the complainant's right to recover depended, "showed a valid deed, provable, though not self-proving." [ 221 Ala. 489 , 129 So. 92 ] An acknowledgment of one of the grantors had been taken before an Arkansas notary public. 1950In Copeland v. Dabbs, supra, decided in 1930, a majority of the court held that the instrument put in evidence and upon which the complainant’s right to recover depended, “showed a valid deed, provable, though not self-proving.” [ 221 Ala. 489 , 129 So. 92 ] An acknowledgment of one of the grantors had been taken before an Arkansas notary public.	1	1950–1950
Mitchell v. State green ala · 1877 1 sentence 1913Until a statute was passed, which had some effect to the contrary, this court declined absolutely to apply the doctrine of error without injury to questions arising in prosecutions for crime. — Mitchell v. State, 60 Ala. 26 ; Maxwell v. State, 89, Ala. 164, 7 South. 824 ; Chief Justice Stone said in Vaughan v. State, 83 Ala. 57 , 3 South. 530 , that it would be a hazardous precedent to establish the doctrine in such cases.	1	1913–1913
Sparrenberger v. State green ala · 1875 1 sentence 1909It is evident that the trial court followed the rule and practice announced by this court in Sparrenberger’s Case, 53 Ala. 481 , 25 Am.	1	1909–1909

Where else courts name it

IL 42 (1895–2022) CA 40 (1905–2020) OK 34 (1912–1984) TX 34 (1916–2018) LA 18 (1913–2023) OH 16 (1858–2025) PA 16 (1921–2015) MO 16 (1883–2021) WA 15 (1919–2024) NY 14 (1838–2024) KS 14 (1914–2002) KY 13 (1907–1977) IN 11 (1917–2017) MI 10 (1892–2018) FL 10 (1917–2007) MN 10 (1889–2003) GA 10 (1913–2008) MS 10 (1950–2017) OR 10 (1965–2011) AL 10 (1909–1990) AR 9 (1903–2002) WI 8 (1913–2021) NE 8 (1916–1993) TN 8 (1923–2014) CT 7 (1931–2024) ID 7 (1931–2005) MT 6 (1933–1995) IA 6 (1882–1998) NC 6 (1934–2018) AZ 5 (1904–2005) WV 4 (1939–1977) SD 4 (1891–1999) MD 4 (1940–2004) UT 4 (1885–2024) NJ 4 (1976–2014) ND 3 (1957–1984) NM 3 (1912–1994) CO 3 (1999–2005) ME 3 (1995–2020) DC 3 (1983–2018) SC 2 (1963–1970) AK 2 (1981–1989) WY 2 (1959–1976) HI 2 (1968–1970) VA 2 (1930–1940) RI 2 (1917–2000)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check