Thomas v. Hudspeth’s Empirical Analysis
127 F.2d 976 · 1942
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1967
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 Dunn v. United States · Dealy v. United States · Selvester v. United States · Wall v. Hudspeth · Reger v. Hudspeth
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Consistency in the verdict is not necessary. Each count in an indictment is regarded as if it was a separate indictment. . . . “That tire verdict may have been the result of compromise, or of a mistake on the part of the jury, is possible. But verdicts cannot be upset by speculation or inquiry into such matters.” (pp. 393, 394.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Freeman
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.