corresponding rule (Alabama) · Go Syfert
← Alabama issues

corresponding rule in Alabama

5 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1928–2017 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.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Price v. Ala. One Credit Union (Ex parte Price)green
ala · 2017 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017See , e.g. , Ex parte Price , 244 So.3d 949 (Ala. 2017) ; and Lloyd Noland Found., Inc. v. HealthSouth Corp. , 979 So.2d 784 , 792-93 (Ala. 2007).

11
City of Birmingham v. City of Fairfieldgreen
ala · 1981 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Image Mktg., Inc. v. Florence Television, L.L.C., 884 So.2d 822, 825 (Ala.2003) (quoting City of Birmingham v. City of Fairfield, 396 So.2d 692, 696 (Ala.1981)) (noting that because “ ‘the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure are modeled on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, federal decisions are highly persuasive when [an appellate court is] called upon to construe the Alabama Rules’ ”).

11
Image Marketing v. Florence Televisiongreen
ala · 2003 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Image Mktg., Inc. v. Florence Television, L.L.C., 884 So.2d 822, 825 (Ala.2003) (quoting City of Birmingham v. City of Fairfield, 396 So.2d 692, 696 (Ala.1981)) (noting that because “ ‘the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure are modeled on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, federal decisions are highly persuasive when [an appellate court is] called upon to construe the Alabama Rules’ ”).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
Foremost Ins. Co. v. Parham green
ala · 1997
2 sentences

2000This corresponding rule does not apply where the documents "are vague or . . . do not reasonably indicate that a fraud has occurred, based on the circumstances of [the] case." Id.

2000This corresponding rule does not apply where the documents “are vague or ... do not reasonably indicate that a fraud has occurred, based on the circumstances of [the] case.” Id.

22000–2000
LLOYD NOLAND FOUNDATION v. HealthSouth Corp. green
ala · 2007
1 sentence

2017See , e.g. , Ex parte Price , 244 So.3d 949 (Ala. 2017) ; and Lloyd Noland Found., Inc. v. HealthSouth Corp. , 979 So.2d 784 , 792-93 (Ala. 2007).

12017–2017
Garner v. Baker green
ala · 1926
1 sentence

1928From this rule of due and reasonable care owing to the guest in the car, by the owner and driver (Rush v. McDonnell, 214 Ala. 47, 51 , 106 So. 175 ; Garner v. Baker, 214 Ala. 3S5, 386, 108 So. 38 ), comes the corresponding requirement of the guest from his knowledge of the facts and appreciated circumstances sufficient to call into effect the duty in the premises by the guest to the owner and driver.

11928–1928
Rush v. McDonnell green
ala · 1925
2 sentences

1928From this rule of due and reasonable care owing to the guest in the car, by the owner and driver (Rush v. McDonnell, 214 Ala. 47, 51 , 106 So. 175 ; Garner v. Baker, 214 Ala. 3S5, 386, 108 So. 38 ), comes the corresponding requirement of the guest from his knowledge of the facts and appreciated circumstances sufficient to call into effect the duty in the premises by the guest to the owner and driver.

1928From this rule of due and reasonable care owing to the guest in the car, by the owner and driver (Rush v. McDonnell, 214 Ala. 47, 51 , 106 So. 175 ; Garner v. Baker, 214 Ala. 3S5, 386, 108 So. 38 ), comes the corresponding requirement of the guest from his knowledge of the facts and appreciated circumstances sufficient to call into effect the duty in the premises by the guest to the owner and driver.

11928–1928

Where else courts name it

IL 32 (1910–2024) CA 31 (1974–2026) MD 18 (1942–2017) FL 17 (1982–2026) MO 17 (1884–2025) TX 16 (1874–2026) NY 16 (1879–2026) PA 15 (1831–2025) NJ 14 (1988–2025) MA 13 (1974–2020) IN 9 (1978–2018) CT 9 (1967–2022) WA 9 (1955–2020) TN 7 (1974–2023) IA 7 (1959–2024) UT 7 (2008–2025) OH 7 (1982–2024) MI 7 (1970–2026) WI 7 (1987–2020) ME 6 (1870–2017) CO 6 (1936–2026) OK 6 (1972–2020) VT 6 (1930–2018) MS 6 (1922–2023) OR 5 (1959–1999) GA 5 (1928–2021) AR 5 (2000–2024) NM 5 (2003–2020) AL 5 (1928–2017) DC 4 (1992–2018) MT 4 (2007–2021) KY 4 (1998–2021) MN 3 (2003–2006) NE 3 (1988–2023) KS 3 (1926–2021) ND 3 (1996–2011) DE 3 (1978–2003) SD 2 (2009–2023) PR 2 (1932–1942) HI 2 (1978–1994) AZ 2 (2010–2014) NC 2 (1982–2015) ID 2 (2003–2015)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check