McConnell v. Eubanks’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The rule is that the testimony of a witness which is uncontradicted, and who is not impeached in some manner known to the law, where he is not contradicted by the circumstances, must be accepted as true. It is true that the direct evidence of a witness may be contradicted by circumstances, but in such case the circumstances relied on for contradiction must be inconsistent with the truth of the testimony. ‘When the testimony of a witness is not contradicted, either by direct evidence or by circumstances, it must be taken as true.’ Stewart v. Coleman [& Co.], 120 Miss. 28 , 81 So. 653 .” 205 Miss, at 722, 39 So.2d at 317 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 248 So. 2d 451 - Hearin-Miller Transporters, Inc. v. Currie

2. “It may be said to be reasonable to infer that the bits of glass, chrome and paint scrapings came from the wrecked Volkswagen. But it is speculation, under the undisputed circumstances of this case, to say that they had come to rest following the impact where found by the patrolman, particularly since the ambulance and numerous other vehicles and pedestrians had traversed the area. (193 So.2d at 429) “In the absence of a showing that conditions remained unchanged after the accident, evidence as to skid marks observed a number of hours later is inadmissible and without probative value.” (193 So.2d at 431)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gunn v. Grice

3. “The Court has repeatedly held that in trials under the common law, to prove a “possibility” only, or to leave the issue to surmise and conjecture, is never sufficient to sustain a verdict in a tort action. A mere scintilla of evidence of negligence is insufficient to make a jury issue. The scintilla rule of evidence is not recognized in this State.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gunn v. Grice