Barr v. Builders, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

72 state decisions

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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The jurisdiction of this court in workmen’s compensation cases is specifically limited to questions of law. “In reviewing a record to determine whether it contains substantial evidence to support the trial court’s finding, this court is required to review all the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party below, and if substantial evidence appears therein, such finding is conclusive and will not be disturbed on review, even though the record discloses some evidence which might warrant the trial court making a finding to the contrary. “The term ‘substantial evidence,’ when applied by this court in reviewing an award under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, means evidence possessing something of substance and relevant consequence and carrying with it fitness to induce conviction that the award is proper, or furnishing substantial basis of fact from which issue tendered can be reasonably resolved.” (Syl. ¶| 1, 2, 3.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Deines v. Greer · Cox v. Ulysses Cooperative Oil & Supply Co.

2. ““The question of whether or not a disabilty of a workman is due to a personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of the employment is a question of fact. “In a review of the record on a question of fact this court’s function is limited to a determination of whether or not the record, viewed in a light most favorable to the party prevailing below, contains substantial competent evidence to support the district court’s findings.” (Syl. ¶¶ 2, 3.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Deines v. Greer

3. ““We thought he (claimant) had a nervous condition called a conversion hysteria . . . the conversion hysteria reaction he had may well be the result of that trauma ... a conversion hysteria could well follow the trauma in an hour, a week or month or two months afterwards, if he had persistent symptoms . . .,” (p. 625.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Turner v. Spencer-Safford Loadcraft, Inc.