Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 WASH 516 - Kellogg v. Cook

Kellogg v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis

1898

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
March 1950
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1950

1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

201898190019101920193019401950decided

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 Thompson v. Dearborn · Davis v. Gilliam

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

  1. ““We have carefully examined and considered the evidence given at the trial, and as a result we are unanimously of the opinion that the verdict was right, and that the judgment entered upon it must be affirmed, without regard to whether technical error was committed by the court in charging the jury. The rule established in this state — and generally followed elsewhere — is that ‘a judgment will not be reversed because of error in giving or refusing instructions, when the verdict rendered is manifestly in accordance with the evidence.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.