Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 207 Miss. 361 - Goodwin v. Misticos

Goodwin v. Misticos’s Empirical Analysis

1949

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
3
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2018

2 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

4019491950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Charles Clifton v. The United States · Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Deselms · Doyle v. Fuerst & Kraemer, Ltd. · Bishop v. Weber · Goldman & Freiman Bottling Co. v. Sindell

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

  1. “[w]e cannot from this inference draw another inference that the bacteria got into the food or drink as a result of the negligence of the restaurateur.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “It will be observed that this suit is not framed on any implied warranty ....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “From the proof the jury could reasonably find:”
    2 later decisions 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.