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 2 courts 1995–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Drummond Co. v. Alabama Department of Transportationgreen2 sentences2007Petition at 17; see also Drummond Co., 937 So.2d at 58 (laying out exceptions to sovereign immunity and not limiting the exception for declaratory-judgment actions to State officials). [5] Rule 25(d), Ala. R. 2007Petition at 17; see also Drummond Co., 937 So.2d at 58 (laying out exceptions to sovereign immunity and not limiting the exception for declaratory-judgment actions to State officials). . | 2 | 2 |
Marous Bros. Construction, L.L.C. v. Alabama State Universitygreen1 sentence2016Because Plaintiffs have alleged facts which fall within an exception to sovereign immunity, the court finds that ASU’s motion to dismiss is due to be denied.” Marous Bros., 533 F.Supp.2d at 1201-02 (alterations in original). | 1 | 1 |
Raley v. Maingreen1 sentence2008It is my conclusion, however, that cases such as Aland have not been careful in their articulation of this exception to sovereign immunity, particularly in light of the absolute immunity that it is now well established extends both to the State and to State agencies." Main v. Raley, 987 So.2d 569, 583 (Ala. 2007) (Murdock, J., concurring in part and concurring in the result) (footnote omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Latham v. Department of Correctionsgreen2 sentences2007In Ex parte Alabama Department of Transportation , we reaffirmed the existence of six exceptions to the rule of sovereign immunity (rather than the four exceptions stated in Aland ) and quoted from precedents worded in such a way as to indicate that all six exceptions are limited to State officials: "There are exceptions to the State's sovereign immunity. "`A state official is not immune from an action that (1) seeks to compel a state official to perform his or her legal duties, (2) seeks to enjoin a state official from enforcing unconstitutional laws, (3) seeks to compel a state official to p 2007In Ex parte Alabama Department of Transportation, we reaffirmed the existence of six exceptions to the rule of sovereign immunity (rather than the four exceptions stated in Aland ) and quoted from precedents worded in such a way as to indicate that all six exceptions are limited to State officials: "There are exceptions to the State's sovereign immunity. "`A state official is not immune from an action that (1) seeks to compel a state official to perform his or her legal duties, (2) seeks to enjoin a state official from enforcing unconstitutional laws, (3) seeks to compel a state official to pe | 1 | 1 |
Curry v. Woodstock Slag Corporationgreen2 sentences2007The case cited by Aland as authority for the declaratory-judgment exception, Curry v. Woodstock Slag Corp., 242 Ala. 379, 381 , 6 So.2d 479, 480-81 (1942), explains that, "[w]hen [a declaratory judgment] is only sought to construe the law and direct the parties, whether individuals or State officers, what it requires of them under a given state of facts, to that extent it does not violate section 14. . . ." (Emphasis added.) Nonetheless, we do not here address whether the declaratory-judgment exception applies to actions against a State agency, and not against a State official, because the cas 2007The case cited by Aland as authority for the declaratory-judgment exception, Curry v. Woodstock Slag Corp., 242 Ala. 379, 381 , 6 So.2d 479, 480-81 (1942), explains that, "[w]hen [a declaratory judgment] is only sought to construe the law and direct the parties, whether individuals or State officers, what it requires of them under a given state of facts, to that extent it does not violate section 14. . . ." (Emphasis added.) Nonetheless, we do not here address whether the declaratory-judgment exception applies to actions against a State agency, and not against a State official, because the cas | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Cartergreen2 sentences1995In Ex parte Carter , 395 So.2d 65 , 68 (Ala. 1980), we specifically stated that actions not prohibited by the sovereign immunity granted under Article I , § 14 , of the Alabama Constitution of 1901, include "valid inverse condemnation actions brought against State officials in their representative capacity." "Inverse condemnation is defined as the taking of private property for public use without formal condemnation proceedings and without just compensation being paid by a governmental agency or entity which has the right or power of condemnation." Carter , 395 So.2d at 67 . 1995In Ex parte Carter , 395 So.2d 65 , 68 (Ala. 1980), we specifically stated that actions not prohibited by the sovereign immunity granted under Article I , § 14 , of the Alabama Constitution of 1901, include "valid inverse condemnation actions brought against State officials in their representative capacity." "Inverse condemnation is defined as the taking of private property for public use without formal condemnation proceedings and without just compensation being paid by a governmental agency or entity which has the right or power of condemnation." Carter , 395 So.2d at 67 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State Hwy. Dept. v. Milton Const. Co.
green
2 sentences2017Even if we assumed this, the circuit court's judgment dismissing the complaint would still be proper (again, leaving aside any statute-of-limitations issue) because the 15 years of service at issue would not have been rendered under circumstances that fall within the exception to sovereign immunity discussed in cases such as State of Alabama Highway Department v. Milton Construction Co. , 586 So.2d 872 (Ala. 1991), and State Board of Administration v. Roquemore , 218 Ala. 120 , 123-24, 117 So. 757 , 760 (1928). 2016Thus, Milton Construction and Marous Brothers recognized that a breach-of-eon-tract claim against the State or its officials is not barred by § 14 immunity when it is “brought to force state employees or agencies to perform their legal duties.” Milton Constr., 586 So.2d at 875 . | 2 | 2016–2017 |
State Board of Administration v. Roquemore
green
2 sentences2017Even if we assumed this, the circuit court's judgment dismissing the complaint would still be proper (again, leaving aside any statute-of-limitations issue) because the 15 years of service at issue would not have been rendered under circumstances that fall within the exception to sovereign immunity discussed in cases such as State of Alabama Highway Department v. Milton Construction Co. , 586 So.2d 872 (Ala. 1991), and State Board of Administration v. Roquemore , 218 Ala. 120 , 123-24, 117 So. 757 , 760 (1928). 2017Even if we assumed this, the circuit court's judgment dismissing the complaint would still be proper (again, leaving aside any statute-of-limitations issue) because the 15 years of service at issue would not have been rendered under circumstances that fall within the exception to sovereign immunity discussed in cases such as State of Alabama Highway Department v. Milton Construction Co. , 586 So.2d 872 (Ala. 1991), and State Board of Administration v. Roquemore , 218 Ala. 120 , 123-24, 117 So. 757 , 760 (1928). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Patterson v. Gladwin Corp.
green
2 sentences2009The claim is not within the exception to sovereign immunity allowed for claims seeking "`to enjoin State officials from enforcing an unconstitutional law.'" Patterson v. Gladwin Corp., 835 So.2d at 142 . 2009The claim is not within the exception to sovereign immunity allowed for claims seeking “ ‘to enjoin State officials from enforcing an unconstitutional law.’ ” Patterson v. Gladwin Corp., 835 So.2d at 142 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Ex Parte Alabama Dept. of Transp.
green
2 sentences2007It is my conclusion, however, that cases such as Aland have not been careful in their articulation of this exception to sovereign immunity, particularly in light of the absolute immunity that it is now well established extends both to the State and to State agencies. 1 A more careful articulation of the declaratory-judgment exception was provided by this Court in Ex parte Alabama Department of Transportation , 978 So.2d 17 , 24 (Ala. 2007). 2007It is my conclusion, however, that cases such as Aland have not been careful in their articulation of this exception to sovereign immunity, particularly in light of the absolute immunity that it is now well established extends both to the State and to State agencies. [1] A more careful articulation of the declaratory-judgment exception was provided by this Court in Ex parte Alabama Department of Transportation, 978 So.2d 17 , 24 (Ala.2007). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
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.