9 Alabama opinions name it 1 courts 1894–2008 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 |
|---|---|---|
Sullivan v. Southern Elec. Generating Co.green1 sentence2008Generating Co., 667 So.2d 722, 725 (Ala.1995)). *8 The enforcement provision of the agreement, § VII(a)(3), does provide that for the State the Montgomery Circuit Court “shall be the only court to which disputes under this Agreement or the Consent Decree are presented.” However, the Montgomery Circuit Court’s broad jurisdictional mandate is limited by the preceding clause of § VII(a)(3) (“except as provided in subsection[ ] ... | 1 | 1 |
Ashburn v. Foxgreen1 sentence1985Accord Ashburn v. Fox , 233 So.2d 840 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1970), cert. dismissed , 242 So.2d 873 (Fla. 1971). | 1 | 1 |
Browning v. Stategreen1 sentence1985Accord Ashburn v. Fox , 233 So.2d 840 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1970), cert. dismissed , 242 So.2d 873 (Fla. 1971). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Head v. Hunnicutt
green
2 sentences1935And in Plead v. Hunnicutt, 172 Ala. 48 , 55 So. 161 , it was pointed out that if two clauses of a deed are entirely inconsistent and irreconcilable with each other, the latter must give way to the former, but if the words of the latter clause are of doubtful import, they will not be construed so as to contradict the certain words of a preceding clause.” It should be further noted that in construing instruments containing contradictory or ambiguous clauses, the first expression of the intention of the parties will govern, unless the intention to thereafter qualify is plainly expressed; and that 1935And in Plead v. Hunnicutt, 172 Ala. 48 , 55 So. 161 , it was pointed out that if two clauses of a deed are entirely inconsistent and irreconcilable with each other, the latter must give way to the former, but if the words of the latter clause are of doubtful import, they will not be construed so as to contradict the certain words of a preceding clause.” It should be further noted that in construing instruments containing contradictory or ambiguous clauses, the first expression of the intention of the parties will govern, unless the intention to thereafter qualify is plainly expressed; and that | 2 | 1922–1935 |
People ex rel. Drake v. Mahaney
green
2 sentences1899Its purposes, and scope were explained by Cooley, J., in People v. Mahoney, ( 13 Mich. 481 ) : “Ibis constitutional provision must receive a reasonable construction, with a view to give it effect. 1894Its purposes and scope were explained by Cooley, J.,in People v. Mahaney, supra.: “Thisconstitutional provision must receive a reasonable construction, with a view to give it effect. | 2 | 1894–1899 |
Hodnett v. Howle
neutral
1 sentence1936In Birmingham Infirmary v. Coe, 206 Ala. 687, 688 , 91 So. 604, 605 , a hot water bottle case, the trial court, by way of explanation of a preceding instruction, said: “ ‘Under all the evidence in this case, you are simply to decide, whatever the temperature of the water was, whether or not the defendant exercised the ordinary precautions demanded -of them, at this time, in view of the condition of the patient, also keeping in view the generally approved customs and methods of other hospitals of like character.’ ” *280 This court treated this language as a pertinent statement, correcting any m | 1 | 1936–1936 |
Birmingham Infirmary v. Coe
neutral
1 sentence1936In Birmingham Infirmary v. Coe, 206 Ala. 687, 688 , 91 So. 604, 605 , a hot water bottle case, the trial court, by way of explanation of a preceding instruction, said: “ ‘Under all the evidence in this case, you are simply to decide, whatever the temperature of the water was, whether or not the defendant exercised the ordinary precautions demanded -of them, at this time, in view of the condition of the patient, also keeping in view the generally approved customs and methods of other hospitals of like character.’ ” *280 This court treated this language as a pertinent statement, correcting any m | 1 | 1936–1936 |
McCombs v. Stephenson
neutral
2 sentences1935McCombs v. Stephenson et al., 154 Ala. 109 , 44 So. 867 ; Robertson et al. v. Robertson et al., 191 Ala. 297, 298 , 68 So. 52 ; Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co., 202 Ala. 333 , 80 So. 415 ; Turk v. Turk et al., 206 Ala. 312 , 89 So. 457 . 1935McCombs v. Stephenson et al., 154 Ala. 109 , 44 So. 867 ; Robertson et al. v. Robertson et al., 191 Ala. 297, 298 , 68 So. 52 ; Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co., 202 Ala. 333 , 80 So. 415 ; Turk v. Turk et al., 206 Ala. 312 , 89 So. 457 . | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Robertson v. Robertson
green
2 sentences1935McCombs v. Stephenson et al., 154 Ala. 109 , 44 So. 867 ; Robertson et al. v. Robertson et al., 191 Ala. 297, 298 , 68 So. 52 ; Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co., 202 Ala. 333 , 80 So. 415 ; Turk v. Turk et al., 206 Ala. 312 , 89 So. 457 . 1935McCombs v. Stephenson et al., 154 Ala. 109 , 44 So. 867 ; Robertson et al. v. Robertson et al., 191 Ala. 297, 298 , 68 So. 52 ; Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co., 202 Ala. 333 , 80 So. 415 ; Turk v. Turk et al., 206 Ala. 312 , 89 So. 457 . | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co.
neutral
2 sentences1935McCombs v. Stephenson et al., 154 Ala. 109 , 44 So. 867 ; Robertson et al. v. Robertson et al., 191 Ala. 297, 298 , 68 So. 52 ; Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co., 202 Ala. 333 , 80 So. 415 ; Turk v. Turk et al., 206 Ala. 312 , 89 So. 457 . 1935McCombs v. Stephenson et al., 154 Ala. 109 , 44 So. 867 ; Robertson et al. v. Robertson et al., 191 Ala. 297, 298 , 68 So. 52 ; Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co., 202 Ala. 333 , 80 So. 415 ; Turk v. Turk et al., 206 Ala. 312 , 89 So. 457 . | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Turk v. Turk
neutral
2 sentences1935McCombs v. Stephenson et al., 154 Ala. 109 , 44 So. 867 ; Robertson et al. v. Robertson et al., 191 Ala. 297, 298 , 68 So. 52 ; Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co., 202 Ala. 333 , 80 So. 415 ; Turk v. Turk et al., 206 Ala. 312 , 89 So. 457 . 1935McCombs v. Stephenson et al., 154 Ala. 109 , 44 So. 867 ; Robertson et al. v. Robertson et al., 191 Ala. 297, 298 , 68 So. 52 ; Cobbs v. Union Naval Stores Co., 202 Ala. 333 , 80 So. 415 ; Turk v. Turk et al., 206 Ala. 312 , 89 So. 457 . | 1 | 1935–1935 |
C. W. Zimmerman Mnfg. Co. v. Daffin
neutral
1 sentence1913Our recent decision in Zimmerman Manufacturing Co. v. Daffin, 149 Ala. 380 , 42 South. 858 , 9 L. | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Allen v. Pierce & Co.
green
1 sentence1913Our recent decision in Zimmerman Manufacturing Co. v. Daffin, 149 Ala. 380 , 42 South. 858 , 9 L. | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Wallace v. Hodges
neutral
2 sentences1913A. [N. S.] 719) ; (b) the judicial motive, supporting the duty always assumed in construing deeds, is to exert all reasonable efforts to reconcile conflicting parts in a deed, and so in the light of the further rule that in clauses in a deed the last must give way to the first; and “if, upon a view of the whole instrument, effect can be given to the subsequent clause or meaning to the subsequent words, consistent with the preceding clause, it is then the duty of the court to so construe them.” — Petty v. Boothe, 19 Ala. 633, 640 ; Wallace v. Hodges, 160 Ala. 276, 281 , 49 South. 312 ; Ex parte 1913A. [N. S.] 719) ; (b) the judicial motive, supporting the duty always assumed in construing deeds, is to exert all reasonable efforts to reconcile conflicting parts in a deed, and so in the light of the further rule that in clauses in a deed the last must give way to the first; and “if, upon a view of the whole instrument, effect can be given to the subsequent clause or meaning to the subsequent words, consistent with the preceding clause, it is then the duty of the court to so construe them.” — Petty v. Boothe, 19 Ala. 633, 640 ; Wallace v. Hodges, 160 Ala. 276, 281 , 49 South. 312 ; Ex parte | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Petty v. Boothe
green
1 sentence1913A. [N. S.] 719) ; (b) the judicial motive, supporting the duty always assumed in construing deeds, is to exert all reasonable efforts to reconcile conflicting parts in a deed, and so in the light of the further rule that in clauses in a deed the last must give way to the first; and “if, upon a view of the whole instrument, effect can be given to the subsequent clause or meaning to the subsequent words, consistent with the preceding clause, it is then the duty of the court to so construe them.” — Petty v. Boothe, 19 Ala. 633, 640 ; Wallace v. Hodges, 160 Ala. 276, 281 , 49 South. 312 ; Ex parte | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Webb v. Webb's Heirs
green
1 sentence1911But, if the words of the latter clause are of doubtful import, they will not be so construed' as to contradict the certain words of a preceding clause. — Petty v. Boothe, supra. It also seems that a granting clause will control an interlocutory recital as to the interest intended to be conveyed, notwithstanding the interlocutory clause may appear first in the deed. — Webb v. Webb, supra. The clause here appears after the granting clause, and, if they were repugnant, the granting clause must pre vail, and if not repugnant, but the latter is of doubtful meaning, the granting clause should explai | 1 | 1911–1911 |
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.