Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 115 NEB 1 - Jessup v. Davis

Jessup v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1926

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
10
states following
December 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently December 2019 · most notably Van Auker v. Steckley's Hybrid Seed Corn Co. (1943), F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Davis (1930)

3 federal appellate · 31 state decisions — followed in 10 states

2001926193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Citizen's L. H. & P. Co. v. Lee · In Re the Probate of the Will of Snelling · Crescent Motor Co. v. Stone · Cunningham v. City of Thief River Falls · Swift & Co. v. Platte

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

  1. “Where a plaintiff in a personal injury action seeks by appropriate interrogatories on the cross-examination to discover whether the defendant is indemnified from loss by an insurance company, it is error for the court to sustain an objection to interrogatories which tend to develop the fact on that question.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “`In view of these obligations, can it be said that such a defendant does not sustain business relations with or employment by the real party in interest which would form a proper subject of cross-examination under the rule above quoted? So, too, when the”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “benevolent judicial concealment” therein, so that their identity, presence and interest may remain totally unknown to the jurors before whom the litigation is tried. In justice to opposing litigants, can this request be complied with? * * *”
    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.