Winterberg v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Lessig v. Reading Transit & Light Co. · Westerkamp v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. · Sheppard v. Wichita Ice & Cold Storage Co. · McLennon v. Whitney-Steen Co. · Brice v. Miller
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`A court cannot accept as true that which the indisputable evidence demonstrates is false.' Lessig v. Reading Transit & Light Co., 270 Pa. 299 , 113 A. 381, 382 . The applicable rule was quoted, with approval in that case from [volume 1,] Elliott on Evidence, [page 38,] section 39, as follows: `Even though it [an appellate court] may not be authorized to weigh evidence and pass upon the facts, it may, and should, so use its juricial [sic] knowledge as to bring about justice. Thus, there are often undisputed physical facts clearly shown in evidence, and by applying to them a well-known law of nature, of mathematics, or the like, it is demonstrated beyond controversy that the verdict or finding is based upon what is untrue and cannot be true. In such case, it is very generally held that the appellate court should take judicial notice of the law of nature or mathematics or quality of matter, or whatever it may be that rules the case and apply it as a trial court should have done.'"”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Chapman v. Redwine
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.