Alexander v. Wehkamp’s Empirical Analysis
1951
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently August 1990
17 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 Sluss v. Brown-Crummer Investment Co. · Carstens v. Earles · Stevens v. Jones · Campbell v. Board of County Commissioners · Abell v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““From an examination of the instructions given, as a whole, and the entire record, we are convinced the jury was fairly apprised of the issues involved, and the failure on the part of the court to give plaintiff’s requested instructions did not prejudicially affect his substantial rights.” (p. 290.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The trial court has a wide discretion as to the special questions to be submitted to the jury, and where it appears that a question is not intended to bring out some ultimate fact in the case it is proper to refuse to submit it.” (Syl. IT5.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Albin v. Munsell
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.