Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 N.C. 695 - State v. . Jacobs

State v. . Jacobs’s Empirical Analysis

1890

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
June 1975
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 1975

1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

30189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Our juries are usually men of intelligence, competent to understand the evidence and draw their own conclusions as to the facts. To construe every remark incidentally made by the judge, in ruling upon debated questions arising on the trial or otherwise, to have such weight upon the mind of the jury as to bias the (691) freedom of their verdict, is as little complimentary to the intelligence and sturdy independence of those who compose our juries as it is to the impartiality of those who are called upon to preside over our Superior and Criminal Courts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “At common law, though the judge, as is still the rule, could not direct a verdict in any criminal case, nor in a civil case, when there was a conflict of evidence, there was no inhibition upon his expressing an opinion upon the facts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “a fact was fully or sufficiently proven.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.