Thompson v. Freeman’s Empirical Analysis
1933
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently July 2006
2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
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.
Relationships
Relies on Hickory v. United States · Hynes v. . McDermott · Miles v. . Loomis · Peck v. . Callaghan · White Sewing Machine Co. v. Gordon
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We approve the rule stated in the case just cited [Hynes v. McDermott, 82 N.Y. 41 , 37 Am.Rep. 538 ] that an expert in handwriting, when speaking as a witness only from a comparison of handwriting, that is, with two or more pieces of it in juxtaposition under his eye, should have before him in court the writing to which he testifies and the writings from which he testifies, else there can be no intelligent examination of him either in chief or in cross, nor can there be fair means of meeting his testimony by that of other witnesses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCormick v. State
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.