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.
6 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1935–1987 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 |
|---|---|---|
Pittman v. City Stores, Inc.green2 sentences1981See, Pittman v. City Stores, Inc. , 204 Tenn. 650 , 325 S.W.2d 249 (1959); Stillwater Floral Co. v. Murray , 380 P.2d 694 (Okla. 1962). 1981See, Pittman v. City Stores, Inc. , 204 Tenn. 650 , 325 S.W.2d 249 (1959); Stillwater Floral Co. v. Murray , 380 P.2d 694 (Okla. 1962). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stillwater Floral Company v. Murray
green
2 sentences1981See, Pittman v. City Stores, Inc. , 204 Tenn. 650 , 325 S.W.2d 249 (1959); Stillwater Floral Co. v. Murray , 380 P.2d 694 (Okla. 1962). 1981See, Pittman v. City Stores, Inc., 204 Tenn. 650 , 325 S.W.2d 249 (1959); Stillwater Floral Co. v. Murray, 380 P.2d 694 (Okl.1962). | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Washington v. State
neutral
1 sentence1987We take careful note that the Supreme Court considered it a condition precedent that the defense must have objected to the portion of the charge considered objectionable before the jury retired for deliberation, citing Johnson v. State , 421 So.2d 1306 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982). *Page 99 In Geter v. State , 468 So.2d 197 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985), we refused to reverse a conviction where there had been no objection made to the court's oral charge, stating: "In Washington v. State , 448 So.2d 398 , 403 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983), this court held that the issue of the court's instructions was not properly preserved f | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Johnson v. State
green
1 sentence1987We take careful note that the Supreme Court considered it a condition precedent that the defense must have objected to the portion of the charge considered objectionable before the jury retired for deliberation, citing Johnson v. State , 421 So.2d 1306 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982). *Page 99 In Geter v. State , 468 So.2d 197 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985), we refused to reverse a conviction where there had been no objection made to the court's oral charge, stating: "In Washington v. State , 448 So.2d 398 , 403 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983), this court held that the issue of the court's instructions was not properly preserved f | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Geter v. State
green
1 sentence1987We take careful note that the Supreme Court considered it a condition precedent that the defense must have objected to the portion of the charge considered objectionable before the jury retired for deliberation, citing Johnson v. State , 421 So.2d 1306 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982). *Page 99 In Geter v. State , 468 So.2d 197 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985), we refused to reverse a conviction where there had been no objection made to the court's oral charge, stating: "In Washington v. State , 448 So.2d 398 , 403 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983), this court held that the issue of the court's instructions was not properly preserved f | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Louisville N. R. Co. v. Martin
green
2 sentences1973International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America v. Hatas, 287 Ala. 344 , 252 So.2d 7 ; Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Martin, 240 Ala. 124 , 198 So. 141 . 1973International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America v. Hatas, 287 Ala. 344 , 252 So.2d 7 ; Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Martin, 240 Ala. 124 , 198 So. 141 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America v. Hatas
green
2 sentences1973International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America v. Hatas, 287 Ala. 344 , 252 So.2d 7 ; Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Martin, 240 Ala. 124 , 198 So. 141 . 1973International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America v. Hatas, 287 Ala. 344 , 252 So.2d 7 ; Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Martin, 240 Ala. 124 , 198 So. 141 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
McGifford v. Protective Life Ins. Co.
green
1 sentence1942Co., 227 Ala. 588 , 151 *261 So. 349, 352, where the Court had again reviewed the Reynolds case with the observation: “In that case we held, under a life policy containing a provision waiving premiums, in the event of permanent total disability of the insured on being furnished due proof thereof, that the furnishing of such proof of disability constituted a condition precedent to waiver of premium, notwithstanding the fact that the insured was insane on the date the premium became due and continued in that state until his death.” This conclusion was rested upon the principle that where the lan | 1 | 1942–1942 |
Equitable Life Assur. Soc. v. Dorriety
neutral
1 sentence1935Soc. v. Dorriety (Ala. Sup.) 157 So. 59 , in which the decisions turned on the failure of the assured to furnish proof of disability “to the insurer” (the furnishing of such proof of disability constituting a condition precedent to waiver of premium payments under the contract) and the failure of payment of premiums due after the injury and to the time of the trial. | 1 | 1935–1935 |
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.