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.
7 Alabama opinions name it 3 courts 1997–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Keindlgreen2 sentences1998See also [ People v. Keindl ], 68 N.Y.2d [410] at 419-20, 502 N.E.2d [577] at 581, 509 N.Y.S.2d 790 ] at 794 [(1996)] (in a jurisdiction in which an allegation as to time in the indictment is statutorily required, the court considers the following factors in determining whether the defendant has been provided sufficient specificity of time to adequately prepare *121 a defense: the span of time set forth; the knowledge that the prosecution has or should have of the exact date of the crime; the age and intelligence of the victim and other witnesses; the surrounding circumstances; and the nature 1998See also [People v. Keindl ], 68 N.Y.2d [410] at 419-20, 502 N.E.2d [577] at 581, 509 N.Y.S.2d 790 ] at 794 [ (1996) ] (in a jurisdiction in which an allegation as to time in the indictment is statutorily required, the court considers the following factors in determining whether the defendant has been provided sufficient specificity of time to adequately pre pare a defense: the span of time set forth; the knowledge that the prosecution has or should have of the exact date of the crime; the age and intelligence of the victim and other witnesses; the surrounding circumstances; and the nature of | 4 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Jones
green
2 sentences1997Moreover, in specific regard to a prosecution resting on generic testimony, “recent expansion of criminal defendants’ due process rights and procedural protections casts doubt on the continued validity of [cases following a strict election rule], at least as applied to generic testimony by molested children.” Jones, 51 Cal.3d at 311 , 270 Cal. Rptr. at 620 , 792 P.2d at 652 . 1997Moreover, in specific regard to a prosecution resting on generic testimony, “recent expansion of criminal defendants’ due process rights and procedural protections casts doubt on the continued validity of [cases following a strict election rule], at least as applied to generic testimony by molested children.” Jones, 51 Cal.3d at 311 , 270 Cal. Rptr. at 620 , 792 P.2d at 652 . | 2 | 1997–1997 |
Hilton v. Braunskill
green
2 sentences2017When considering a motion to stay a trial court's judgment pending appeal, this court considers the following factors: "(1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies." Hilton v. Braunskill , 481 U.S. 770 , 776, 107 S.Ct. 2113 , 95 L.Ed.2d 724 (1987). 2017When considering a motion to stay a trial court's judgment pending appeal, this court considers the following factors: "(1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies." Hilton v. Braunskill , 481 U.S. 770 , 776, 107 S.Ct. 2113 , 95 L.Ed.2d 724 (1987). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby
green
1 sentence2000The trial judge held a Hammond [1] hearing and concluded that the award is not excessive and does not deny ConAgra due process under the circumstances of this case: "In determining whether the punitive damages award in this case is unconstitutionally excessive, the Court considers the following factors established in Hammond v. City of Gadsden, 493 So.2d 1374 (Ala.1986), Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218 (Ala.1989), and BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed.2d 809 (1996). "(1) Degree of Reprehensibility of the Defendant's Conduct. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore
green
2 sentences2000The trial judge held a Hammond [1] hearing and concluded that the award is not excessive and does not deny ConAgra due process under the circumstances of this case: "In determining whether the punitive damages award in this case is unconstitutionally excessive, the Court considers the following factors established in Hammond v. City of Gadsden, 493 So.2d 1374 (Ala.1986), Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218 (Ala.1989), and BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed.2d 809 (1996). "(1) Degree of Reprehensibility of the Defendant's Conduct. 2000The trial judge held a Hammond [1] hearing and concluded that the award is not excessive and does not deny ConAgra due process under the circumstances of this case: "In determining whether the punitive damages award in this case is unconstitutionally excessive, the Court considers the following factors established in Hammond v. City of Gadsden, 493 So.2d 1374 (Ala.1986), Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218 (Ala.1989), and BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed.2d 809 (1996). "(1) Degree of Reprehensibility of the Defendant's Conduct. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Hammond v. City of Gadsden
green
1 sentence2000The trial judge held a Hammond [1] hearing and concluded that the award is not excessive and does not deny ConAgra due process under the circumstances of this case: "In determining whether the punitive damages award in this case is unconstitutionally excessive, the Court considers the following factors established in Hammond v. City of Gadsden, 493 So.2d 1374 (Ala.1986), Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218 (Ala.1989), and BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed.2d 809 (1996). "(1) Degree of Reprehensibility of the Defendant's Conduct. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Bb Asset Management, Inc., Dba Brown Bag Software v. Symantec Corp.
green
1 sentence1999Barnett cites Intercontinental Life Insurance Co. v. Lindblom , 598 So.2d 886 (Ala. 1992) (on remand from the United States Supreme Court), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 869 (1992), and Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip , 553 So.2d 537 (Ala. 1989), aff'd, 499 U.S. 1 (1991), in support of her argument that by receiving and retaining her premium payments, the defendants assumed a duty to disclose. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. Haslip
green
1 sentence1999Barnett cites Intercontinental Life Insurance Co. v. Lindblom , 598 So.2d 886 (Ala. 1992) (on remand from the United States Supreme Court), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 869 (1992), and Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip , 553 So.2d 537 (Ala. 1989), aff'd, 499 U.S. 1 (1991), in support of her argument that by receiving and retaining her premium payments, the defendants assumed a duty to disclose. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Intercontinental Life Ins. Co. v. Lindblom
green
1 sentence1999Barnett cites Intercontinental Life Insurance Co. v. Lindblom , 598 So.2d 886 (Ala. 1992) (on remand from the United States Supreme Court), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 869 (1992), and Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip , 553 So.2d 537 (Ala. 1989), aff'd, 499 U.S. 1 (1991), in support of her argument that by receiving and retaining her premium payments, the defendants assumed a duty to disclose. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Owen
green
1 sentence1999In determining whether the defendants had a duty to inform Barnett of that fact, this Court considers the following factors: "(1) the relationship of the parties; (2) the relative knowledge of the parties; (3) the value of the particular fact; (4) the plaintiff's opportunity to ascertain the fact; (5) the customs of the trade; and (6) other relevant circumstances." Owen , 729 So.2d at 842-43 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip
green
1 sentence1999Barnett cites Intercontinental Life Insurance Co. v. Lindblom , 598 So.2d 886 (Ala. 1992) (on remand from the United States Supreme Court), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 869 (1992), and Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip , 553 So.2d 537 (Ala. 1989), aff'd, 499 U.S. 1 (1991), in support of her argument that by receiving and retaining her premium payments, the defendants assumed a duty to disclose. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.