114 Ind. App. 125 - Duffy v. Hayden’s Empirical Analysis
1943
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Whisler v. Whisler · Mesker v. Bishop · Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Norman · 101 Ind. App. 707 - State Ex Rel. Michael v. Cooper · 101 Ind. App. 54 - Robinson v. Hilbrich
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . each specification of error must be so specific and certain as to clearly indicate the particular ruling on which it is based . . .,” and “. . . in considering the sufficiency of such assignment of error all ambiguities and uncertainties must be construed against the pleading. The court cannot indulge presumptions and thereby supply what the appellants may have intended by their pleading.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
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.