Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 116 F.1d 803 - Cunningham v. Underwood

Cunningham v. Underwood’s Empirical Analysis

116 F. 803 · 1902

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
March 1978
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Washington Gas Light Co. v. Lansden · Phillips and Colby Construction Company v. Seymour et al. · Hansen v. Boyd · Post Pub. Co. v. Hallam · Gifford v. People

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

  1. “‘•When antecedent words are capable, as a matter of law, of being understood in more than one sense, it is tile office of an innuendo to designate that meaning which the plaintiff proposes to establish as the meaning intended by the defendant and understood by those who heard or read them.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.