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.
8 Alabama opinions name it 3 courts 1952–2002 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 |
|---|---|---|
Leverett v. Stategreen1 sentence2000See McLaughlin v. State, 586 So.2d 267, 271 (Ala.Crim.App.1991) (quoting Leverett v. State, 462 So.2d 972, 977 (Ala.Crim.App.1984) (“ ‘The doctrine of invited error has been specifically applied to possible error resulting from the defendant’s request for a particular jury instruction.’ ”)), overruled, on other ground, Quinlivan v. State, 627 So.2d 1082, 1088-89 (Ala.Crim.App.1992). | 1 | 1 |
McLaughlin v. Stategreen1 sentence2000See McLaughlin v. State, 586 So.2d 267, 271 (Ala.Crim.App.1991) (quoting Leverett v. State, 462 So.2d 972, 977 (Ala.Crim.App.1984) (“ ‘The doctrine of invited error has been specifically applied to possible error resulting from the defendant’s request for a particular jury instruction.’ ”)), overruled, on other ground, Quinlivan v. State, 627 So.2d 1082, 1088-89 (Ala.Crim.App.1992). | 1 | 1 |
Quinlivan v. Stategreen1 sentence2000See McLaughlin v. State, 586 So.2d 267, 271 (Ala.Crim.App.1991) (quoting Leverett v. State, 462 So.2d 972, 977 (Ala.Crim.App.1984) (“ ‘The doctrine of invited error has been specifically applied to possible error resulting from the defendant’s request for a particular jury instruction.’ ”)), overruled, on other ground, Quinlivan v. State, 627 So.2d 1082, 1088-89 (Ala.Crim.App.1992). | 1 | 1 |
In Re WINSHIPgreen2 sentences1997See In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364 , 90 S.Ct. 1068, 1073 , 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970). 1997See In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364 , 90 S.Ct. 1068, 1073 , 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970). | 1 | 1 |
Wilkerson v. Hagangreen2 sentences1990See Wilkerson v. Hagan, 265 Ala. 515 , 92 So.2d 901 (1957); Barnett v. Crumpton, 247 Ala. 572 , 25 So.2d 414 (1946); 34 C.J.S. 1990See Wilkerson v. Hagan, 265 Ala. 515 , 92 So.2d 901 (1957); Barnett v. Crumpton, 247 Ala. 572 , 25 So.2d 414 (1946); 34 C.J.S. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Chandler v. Whatley
green
2 sentences2002Further, the Comment to § 26-10A-9 states that an implied consent was intended as a substitute "when it is not possible to obtain the actual consent of a person who is specified in § 26-10A-7." Moreover, § 26-10A-24(a)(3) allows for the contest of an adoption resulting from either "an actual or implied consent or relinquishment" based on whether, at the time of the contested hearing, the "actual or implied consent or relinquishment to the adoption is valid." (Emphasis added.) Likewise, § 26-10A-24(d)(3) expressly provides that an adoption proceeding shall be dismissed if, at the time of the co 2002Further, the Comment to § 26-10A-9 states that an implied consent was intended as a substitute "when it is not possible to obtain the actual consent of a person who is specified in § 26-10A-7." Moreover, § 26-10A-24(a)(3) allows for the contest of an adoption resulting from either "an actual or implied consent or relinquishment" based on whether, at the time of the contested hearing, the "actual or implied consent or relinquishment to the adoption is valid." (Emphasis added.) Likewise, § 26-10A-24(d)(3) expressly provides that an adoption proceeding shall be dismissed if, at the time of the co | 2 | 2002–2002 |
Street v. City of Anniston
green
2 sentences2001Street v. City of Anniston, 381 So.2d 26 (Ala.1980). 2001Street v. City of Anniston, 381 So.2d 26 (Ala.1980). | 2 | 2001–2001 |
Barnett v. Crumpton
neutral
2 sentences1990See Wilkerson v. Hagan, 265 Ala. 515 , 92 So.2d 901 (1957); Barnett v. Crumpton, 247 Ala. 572 , 25 So.2d 414 (1946); 34 C.J.S. 1990See Wilkerson v. Hagan, 265 Ala. 515 , 92 So.2d 901 (1957); Barnett v. Crumpton, 247 Ala. 572 , 25 So.2d 414 (1946); 34 C.J.S. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Schmale v. Bolte
green
2 sentences1952Code of 1940, Tit. 7, § 433; Schmale v. Bolte, 255 Ala. 115 , 50 So.2d 262 . 1952Code of 1940, Tit. 7, § 433; Schmale v. Bolte, 255 Ala. 115 , 50 So.2d 262 . | 1 | 1952–1952 |
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.