118 Ind. App. 310 - American Security Co. v. Minard’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently December 1978
3 federal appellate · 12 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 Mutual Life Ins Co of New York v. Hillmon · Hinchcliffe v. Koontz · Burr v. Smith · 94 Ind. App. 689 - Koenig v. Bryce · 114 Ind. App. 177 - Asbestos Insulating & Roofing Co. v. Schrock
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It seems that our courts in the shadowy borderland of exception to the hearsay rule of evidence have laid out a path which is dim, but nevertheless plain enough that we feel constrained to follow it, which makes such declarations of the existence of a particular intention made contemporaneous with, or immediately preparatory to, a particular litigated act admissible as evidence which tends to illustrate and give character to such act. Burr v. Smith (1898), 152 Ind. 469 , 53 N. E. 469 ; Hinchcliffe v. Koontz (1889), 121 Ind. 422 , 23 N. E. 271 ; Koenig v. Bryce (1932), 94 Ind. App. 689 , 180 N. E. 682 ; Bakers Consulting Bureau v. Julian (1936), 103 Ind. App. 218 , 6 N. E. 2d 737 . “In Koenig v. Bryce, supra, the court refers to the rule with citations in the following language: “ ‘In the case of Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Hillman (1892), 145 U. S. 285 , 36 L. Ed. 706 , the Supreme Court of the United States in discussing evidence of this character said: “A man’s state of mind or feeling can only be manifested to others by countenance, attitude or gesture or by sounds or words, spoken or written. The nature of the fact to be proved is the same, and evidence of its proper tokens is equally com petent to prove it, whether expressed by aspect or conduct, by voice or pen. When the intention to be proved is important only as qualifying an act, its connection with that act must be shown, in order to warrant the admission of declarations of the intention. But whenever the intention is ”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““It seems that our courts in the shadowy borderland of exception to the hearsay rule of evidence have laid out a path which is dim, but nevertheless plain enough that we feel constrained to follow it, which make such declarations of the existence of a particular intention made contemporaneous with, or immediately preparatory to, a particular litigated act, admissible as evidence, which tends to illustrate and give character to such act. (Citing cases.)” (Our emphasis.)”
2 later decisions 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.