Hallman v. Gross’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently November 2013 · most notably Baltimore Transit Co. v. Mezzanotti (1961), Snowhite v. State, Use of Tennant (1966)
30 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 Hickman v. Taylor · Anderson v. Watson · Eastern States Corp. v. Eisler · 29 F. Supp. 502 - Kenealy v. Texas Co. · Piest v. Tide Water Oil 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * The purpose of the discovery was to find pertinent and material evidence, not privileged. No matter discovered in this process would be evidence unless it was pertinent and material and not privileged. If the chancellor in the trial of the case should rule on such matters, it is not conceivable that the party ruled against could stop the proceedings and take an appeal to this court. The matter would have to be raised on an appeal from the final decree.””
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.