Martin v. Martin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The CouRT. — Within one year after the last will of the decedent had been admitted to probate, the appellant filed his petition for the revocation of the probate. Upon issues made by the answer of the respondents the cause was tried before a jury, who found upon certain special issues submitted to them in accordance with the petition, and thereupon the court made its order revoking the probate. Respondents thereupon moved for a new trial, which was granted, and the petitioner has appealed from the order. One of the grounds upon which the motion was made is the insufficiency of the evidence to Justify the verdict, and the motion was heard upon a statement <of the case, in which the evidence is set out at length. The order of the -court is in general terms granting a new trial, without specifying the grounds of its action, and, in support of the order, we may assume that it was made upon the ground of such insufficiency of evidence. '‘ The code does not require the court to specify the grounds which govern its action in granting or refusing a new trial, and even when such provision was contained in the statute, it was held to be merely •directory. (Borkheim v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 38 Cal. 505 .) Its action is to be reviewed upon the record on which the order was made, and will be sustained if the matters contained in that record would, under any circumstances, authorize it to grant a new trial. (Kauffman v. Majer, 94 Cal. 269 .) “Counsel for appellants has discussed at ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Körber & Co., Inc. v. Aboy, Vidal & Co., Inc.