8 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Averytgreen2 sentences2025In Ex parte Avert, 487 So. 2d 912 (Ala. 1986), our supreme court held that the Mobile County Personnel Board, and the Mobile Circuit Court upon judicial review of the decision of that board, could not consider a federal due- process claim, which, the supreme court said, must be filed in an independent and collateral suit filed in the circuit court. 2025In Ex parte Avert, 487 So. 2d 912 (Ala. 1986), our supreme court held that the Mobile County Personnel Board, and the Mobile Circuit Court upon judicial review of the decision of that board, could not consider a federal due- process claim, which, the supreme court said, must be filed in an independent and collateral suit filed in the circuit court. | 1 | 4 |
Ex Parte Boyettegreen2 sentences2025The supreme court further held that the Jefferson Circuit Court could not consider the ADEA claim on appeal from the decision of the JCPB, 7 CL-2024-0844 even though the enabling act establishing the JCPB authorized the Jefferson Circuit Court " 'to review questions of law.' " 728 So. 2d at 645 (emphasis omitted) (quoting Act No. 1945-248, Ala. Acts 1945, § 22, as amended by Act No. 1977-679, Ala. Acts 1977, p. 1176). 2025The supreme court further held that the Jefferson Circuit Court could not consider the ADEA claim on appeal from the decision of the JCPB, 7 CL-2024-0844 even though the enabling act establishing the JCPB authorized the Jefferson Circuit Court " 'to review questions of law.' " 728 So. 2d at 645 (emphasis omitted) (quoting Act No. 1945-248, Ala. Acts 1945, § 22, as amended by Act No. 1977-679, Ala. Acts 1977, p. 1176). | 1 | 2 |
Dooley v. AutoNation USA Corp.green1 sentence2005Corp., 242 F.Supp.2d 1070, 1076-77 (M.D.Ala.2003) (holding that the statute of limitations for an AADEA claim is the longer of (a) the time for filing a federal ADEA claim, or (b) 450 days after the complained-of act), and with Dooley v. AutoNation USA Corp., 218 F.Supp.2d 1270, 1276 (N.D.Ala.2002) (adopting two-year statute of limitations of Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-38(Z), for AADEA claims). | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Regions Financial Corp.green1 sentence2005Corp., 242 F.Supp.2d 1070, 1076-77 (M.D.Ala.2003) (holding that the statute of limitations for an AADEA claim is the longer of (a) the time for filing a federal ADEA claim, or (b) 450 days after the complained-of act), and with Dooley v. AutoNation USA Corp., 218 F.Supp.2d 1270, 1276 (N.D.Ala.2002) (adopting two-year statute of limitations of Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-38(Z), for AADEA claims). | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Equifax Services, Inc.green2 sentences1998Accordingly, because we “will affirm the judgment appealed from if supported on any valid legal ground,” Smith v. Equifax Servs., Inc., 537 So.2d 463, 465 (Ala.1988), the summary judgment is due to be affirmed as to the employee’s ADEA claim against the Board and Bucke-lew. 1998Accordingly, because we “will affirm the judgment appealed from if supported on any valid legal ground,” Smith v. Equifax Servs., Inc., 537 So.2d 463, 465 (Ala.1988), the summary judgment is due to be affirmed as to the employee’s ADEA claim against the Board and Bucke-lew. | 1 | 1 |
Colombo A. SPAGNUOLO, Appellee, v. WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, Appellantgreen1 sentence1986See also Spagnuolo v. Whirlpool Corp., 641 F.2d 1109 (4th Cir.1981) (58-year old demoted employee replaced by 40-year old successfully established ADEA claim). | 1 | 1 |
Frank Douglas v. Marvin Anderson, Raymond Hanson, Board of Directors, Hastings College of Law and Hastings Service Foundation, Inc., a Corporationgreen1 sentence1986Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has held that “replacement by even an older employee will not necessarily foreclose prima facie proof if other direct or circumstantial evidence supports an inference of discrimination.” Douglas v. Anderson, 656 F.2d 528, 533 (9th Cir.1981). | 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 Smith
green
2 sentences2002The court discussed Ex parte Averyt, supra, and Ex parte Smith, supra, holding that those cases were not inconsistent, because § 41-22-20 of the AAPA, which was involved in Smith, gives the reviewing court broader jurisdiction than it usually has in appeals from an administrative decision, such as in Averyt. 2002The court discussed Ex parte Averyt, supra, and Ex parte Smith, supra, holding that those cases were not inconsistent, because § 41-22-20 of the AAPA, which was involved in Smith, gives the reviewing court broader jurisdiction than it usually has in appeals from an administrative decision, such as in Averyt. | 2 | 1998–2002 |
Stallworth v. City of Evergreen
green
2 sentences2002Reebals cites Stallworth v. City of Evergreen, 680 So.2d 229 (Ala.1996), in support of his argument that a conflict of interest is a question of law that can be addressed by the panel. 2002Reebals cites Stallworth v. City of Evergreen, 680 So.2d 229 (Ala.1996), in support of his argument that a conflict of interest is a question of law that can be addressed by the panel. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.
green
2 sentences1998Id. , 500 U.S. at 35 , 111 S.Ct. at 1656 -1657 . 1998Id. , 500 U.S. at 35 , 111 S.Ct. at 1656 -1657 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.