Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 199 So. 2d 261 - Moore v. Chambers

199 So. 2d 261 - Moore v. Chambers’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
December 1984
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Stokes v. State · Wilson v. Peacock · Gillespie v. State · Chilcutt v. Keating · Savell v. Schultz, Baujan & 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Mere rules of practice should never stand in the way of permitting the jury to hear all the witnesses, and in this case the record discloses that nothing save a rule of practice denied this substantial mle of justice to the defendants. The trial court has the power, and should always exercise it, to relax or suspend all court rules, to the end that litigants may be assured of a full and fair hearing of this side of the controversy. The record does not show any reason why the discovery of the actual tmth would have been imperiled by the defendant’s testimony, and, in the absence of such showing, we think the trial court erred in refusing to permit the witness to testify.” (Emphasis added.) 199 So.2d at 263 .”
    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.