State ex rel. Brown v. Lyons’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In the rivalry and bustle which often attend the conduct of a stoutly contested lawsuit, it is not very unusual for opposing counsel to disagree as to some of the incidents which transpire in the course of a trial. . . . “Here, then, is a triangular dispute as to a question of facjt — that it did happen, that it did not happen, and that something pertinent though different did informally happen. This court cannot resolve such a dispute. That is the function of the trial court. (Bruington v. Wagoner, 100 Kan. 439 , 164 Pac. 1057 .) Moreover, if the trial judge had been positive as to the accuracy of his own recollection of the incident, his personal knowledge would have been equivalent to evidence. (Christisen v. Bartlett, 73 Kan. 401, 403 , 84 Pac. 530 , 85 Pac. 594 .)” (pp. 862, 863.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Cruse

2. ““Moreover, if the trial judge had been positive as to the accuracy of his own recollection of the incident, his personal knowledge would have been equivalent to evidence.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cazzell v. Cazzell