Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 180 W. Va. 447 - State v. Catlett

180 W. Va. 447 - State v. Catlett’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
June 2004
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 151 W. Va. 1 - State v. Hamric · 165 W. Va. 572 - State v. Demastus · 159 W. Va. 691 - State v. Milam · Halstead v. Horton · 157 W. Va. 711 - State v. Britton

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

  1. ““A new trial will not be granted on the ground of newly-discovered evidence unless the case comes within the following rules: (1) The evidence must appear to have been discovered since the trial, and, from the affidavit of the new witness, what such evidence will be, or its absence satisfactorily explained. (2) It must appear from facts stated in his affidavit that plaintiff was diligent in ascertaining and securing his evidence, and that the new evidence is such that due diligence would not have secured it before the verdict. (3) Such evidence must be new and material, and not merely cumulative; and cumulative evidence is additional evidence of the same kind to the same point. (4) The evidence must be such as ought to produce an opposite result at a second trial on the merits. (5) And the new trial will generally be refused when the sole object of the new evidence is to discredit or impeach a witness on the opposite side.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.