Legal Opinion

Emanuel v. McGriff

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 17, 1992No. 1901334PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

In this appeal, we consider the constitutionality of the common law doctrine of necessaries. The appellant, Betty Emanuel, contends that the doctrine constitutes unconstitutional gender-based discrimination and violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. While the appellees, Dr. James McGriff and Huntsville Hospital, acknowledge that the application of this doctrine only to men violates the constitution, they argue that this Court should make the doctrine constitutional by making it applicable to women as well. We decline to extend the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Reed v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Orr v. OrrSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Califano v. GoldfarbSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Schilling v. Bedford County Memorial Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1983
  5. Mount v. Baptist Hospital of Gadsden, Inc.Alabama Court of Appeals · 1966

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Southern New Hampshire Medical Center v. HayesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2010
  2. Connor v. SOUTHWEST FLA. REGIONAL MED. CTR.Supreme Court of Florida · 1995
  3. Ex Parte Bunting Plastic Surgery ClinicSupreme Court of Alabama · 1993
  4. Bunting Plastic Surgery Clinic, P.C. v. TuckerCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1992
  5. Lenton v. LawlerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1994

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API