Bufford v. Little’s Empirical Analysis
1909
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently April 1964 · most notably Louisville N. R. Co. v. Scott (1935), Simmons v. Cochran (1949)
25 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 Ala. Great Southern R. R. v. Hill · Sanders v. Knox · Linnehan v. State · Bass Furnace Co. v. Glasscock · Mobile, Jackson & Kansas City Railroad v. Riley
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ . . . . The objection was general, or, if specific, did not specify the ground covering the objectionable feature of the evidence introduced. A general objection, ‘because the same was illegal, irrelevant, and incompetent,’ cannot be sustained, unless the evidence is manifestly illegal and irrelevant, and apparently incapable of being rendered admissible in connection with other evidence. Sanders v. Knox, 57 Ala. 83 . . . . ” Bufford v. Little, 159 Ala. 300, 303 , 48 So. 697, 698 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Granberry v. Gilbert
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.