Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 199 U.S. 142 - Florida McGuire v. William a Blount C M

Florida McGuire v. William a Blount C M’s Empirical Analysis

199 U.S. 142 · 1905

Citation profile

67
cited by 67 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
February 1981
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 13 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 67 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1981 · most notably Gunning v. Cooley (1930), Baltimore Co v. Groeger (1925)

26 federal appellate · 13 district · 10 state decisions

180190519101920193019401950196019701980decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Union Pac Ry Co v. McDonald · Delaware Co v. Converse · The United States v. Don Fernando De La Maza Arredondo · Elliott v. Chicago M St P Ry Co · Board of County Com'rs of the County of Anderson v. Beal

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

  1. ““It is strenuously urged that, whatever the merits of the controversy, there was sufficient proof to require the trial court to submit the case to a jury; but no I'ule is better established in this court than that which permits a presiding judge to direct a verdict in favor of one of the parties when the testimony dnd all the inferences which the jury could justifiably draw therefrom would be insufficient to support a different verdict. It is clear that, where a court would be bound to set aside a verdict for want of testimony to support it, it may direct a finding in the first instance, and not await the enforcement of its view by granting a new trial.””
    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.