Armstrong v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently May 1963
10 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 Spencer v. Schell · Phoenix Assurance Co. of London v. Stobaugh · Wallace v. Stevens · First National Bank v. San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Co. · 39 Tex. Civ. App. 1 - Field v. Field
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Bill Armstrong and wife sued Bob L. Marshall for damages caused by the alleged wrongful killing of their son Walter Armstrong. They sued both as parents and as sole heirs at law of the deceased. The damages claimed were: $8,000, loss of financial support; $5,-000, mental and physical pain suffered by deceased prior to his death; and $343, burial expenses, itemized as funeral ($198), cemetery lot ($90), and tombstone ($55).” * * * * * * “As heirs of their deceased son appellants’ suit was predicated upon the survival statute, art. 5525, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St, art 5525, and the right of recovery based upon and limited to that which had accrued to the deceased at the time of his death. The cause of action which survived was one for unlawful injury and the recovery limited to the incident damage, which, in the instant case, was asserted to be (other than burial expenses noted later) physical and mental pain suffered by deceased up to the time of his death. * * ⅛ * * * “ * * * as to the items included in burial expenses. These items were properly proved and found upon, and under the authorities they appear to be recoverable either by the estate or the parents (the latter having paid them.) * * * ” (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harper v. Johnson
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.