Stegall v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
1904
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 1950
14 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 Winston v. Hodges · Hodges v. Tennessee Implement Co. · Singleton, Hunt & Co. v. Thomas · Hart v. Freeman · Scruggs v. Bibb
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The statute does not in any way change the probative force of a receipt. It simply declares that it must have effect according to the intention of the parties. In ascertaining what the intention of the parties was, the rules of evidence are the same as they were before the statute.” (Italics supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Barbour v. Poncelor““But, even if its wording could bé construed as a receipt in full for the entire claim, a receipt in full is only presumptive evidence of the payment of a demand, and simply places upon the creditor'the burden of proving that ‘such demand was not in fact included in it.’ ”,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Vickery v. Baggett
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.