8 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1909–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Morgan & Pottinger, Attorneys, P.S.C. v. Bottsgreen2 sentences2018This provision is consistent with the overall purpose of Rule XIX to engender confidence by the public in Louisiana's lawyer regulatory system." In re Raspanti , 8 So.3d 526 , 533-34 (La. 2009) ; see also Morgan & Pottinger, Attorneys, P.S.C. v. Botts , 348 S.W.3d 599 , 603-04 (Ky. 2011) ("Though few cases exist interpreting the typically broad language of these rules, at least four courts have specifically concluded that the privilege would bar even claims relating to the act of filing the complaint, such as malicious prosecution or abuse of process. 2018This provision is consistent with the overall purpose of Rule XIX to engender confidence by the public in Louisiana's lawyer regulatory system." In re Raspanti , 8 So.3d 526 , 533-34 (La. 2009) ; see also Morgan & Pottinger, Attorneys, P.S.C. v. Botts , 348 S.W.3d 599 , 603-04 (Ky. 2011) ("Though few cases exist interpreting the typically broad language of these rules, at least four courts have specifically concluded that the privilege would bar even claims relating to the act of filing the complaint, such as malicious prosecution or abuse of process. | 2 | 2 |
Wallace v. Jarvisgreen2 sentences2018See Wallace v. Jarvis , 119 N.C. 2018See Wallace v. Jarvis , 119 N.C. | 2 | 2 |
Davis v. Teaguegreen2 sentences1977It is rather considered as a political privilege or civil right under the control of the state, which it may regulate or restrict, so long as the right of suffrage is not denied to any person on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. [Citations Omitted]” Davis v. Teague, 220 Ala. 309, 312, 313 , 125 So. 51, 54 (1929). 1977It is rather considered as a political privilege or civil right under the control of the state, which it may regulate or restrict, so long as the right of suffrage is not denied to any person on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. [Citations Omitted]” Davis v. Teague, 220 Ala. 309, 312, 313 , 125 So. 51, 54 (1929). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Raspanti
green
2 sentences2018This provision is consistent with the overall purpose of Rule XIX to engender confidence by the public in Louisiana's lawyer regulatory system." In re Raspanti , 8 So.3d 526 , 533-34 (La. 2009) ; see also Morgan & Pottinger, Attorneys, P.S.C. v. Botts , 348 S.W.3d 599 , 603-04 (Ky. 2011) ("Though few cases exist interpreting the typically broad language of these rules, at least four courts have specifically concluded that the privilege would bar even claims relating to the act of filing the complaint, such as malicious prosecution or abuse of process. 2018This provision is consistent with the overall purpose of Rule XIX to engender confidence by the public in Louisiana's lawyer regulatory system." In re Raspanti , 8 So.3d 526 , 533-34 (La. 2009) ; see also Morgan & Pottinger, Attorneys, P.S.C. v. Botts , 348 S.W.3d 599 , 603-04 (Ky. 2011) ("Though few cases exist interpreting the typically broad language of these rules, at least four courts have specifically concluded that the privilege would bar even claims relating to the act of filing the complaint, such as malicious prosecution or abuse of process. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Arnold v. State
green
2 sentences2011In Arnold the Court applied the confidential communications privilege to the facts of that case and determined that the privilege did not bar ‘testimony by one spouse concerning an overheard conversation between the other [spouse] and a third party.’ Id. at 527 . 1986In Arnold the Court applied the confidential communications privilege to the facts of that case and determined that the privilege did not bar "testimony by one spouse concerning an overheard conversation between the other [spouse] and a third party." Id. at 527 . | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Schmerber v. California
green
2 sentences1978The distinction which has emerged, often expressed in different ways, is that the privilege is a bar against compelling `communications' or `testimony' but that compulsion which makes a suspect or accused the source of `real or physical evidence' does not violate it." 384 U.S. at 763-64 , 86 S.Ct. at 1832 , 16 L.Ed.2d at 916 . (footnote omitted). 1978The distinction which has emerged, often expressed in different ways, is that the privilege is a bar against compelling `communications' or `testimony' but that compulsion which makes a suspect or accused the source of `real or physical evidence' does not violate it." 384 U.S. at 763-64 , 86 S.Ct. at 1832 , 16 L.Ed.2d at 916 . (footnote omitted). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Hubbard v. State
green
2 sentences1974The Alabama Supreme Court has also adopted the Holt, supra, Schmerber, supra, rationale in Hubbard v. State, 283 Ala. 183 , 215 So.2d 261 , where it was held proper to require an accused to remove his clothes which were analyzed and used as evidence against him. 1974The Alabama Supreme Court has also adopted the Holt, supra, Schmerber, supra, rationale in Hubbard v. State, 283 Ala. 183 , 215 So.2d 261 , where it was held proper to require an accused to remove his clothes which were analyzed and used as evidence against him. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Estate of Johnson
green
2 sentences1909The clause of the Constitution is protective merely, not destructive, nor yet even restrictive. * * * It nowhere intimates that an immunity conferred upon citizens of a state, because not in terms conferred upon citizens of sister states, shall therefore be void. * * * The Constitution itself becomes a part of the law. * * * They (the courts) .have never stricken down the immunity and privilege which a state may have accorded to its own citizens. * * * They have always construed the law so as to relieve the citizens of other states, and place all upon equal footing. * * In all these cases and 1909The clause of the Constitution is protective merely, not destructive, nor yet even restrictive. * * * It nowhere intimates that an immunity conferred upon citizens of a state, because not in terms conferred upon citizens of sister states, shall therefore be void. * * * The Constitution itself becomes a part of the law. * * * They (the courts) .have never stricken down the immunity and privilege which a state may have accorded to its own citizens. * * * They have always construed the law so as to relieve the citizens of other states, and place all upon equal footing. * * In all these cases and | 1 | 1909–1909 |
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.