Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 F.2d 298 - Barrett v. Fournial

Barrett v. Fournial’s Empirical Analysis

21 F.2d 298 · 1927

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
May 1950
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 1950

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

301927193019401950decided

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 Jones v. . Morgan · State v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co. · Berry v. Ingalls · Chicago & E. R. v. Ohio City Lumber Co. · Union Pac. R. v. Lucas

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

  1. ““Personal Property Value. Here the general test, that any one familiar with the values in question may testify, is liberally applied, and with few attempts to lay down detailed minor tests. The owner of an article, whether he is generally familiar with such values or not, ought certainly to be allowed to estimate its worth; the weight of his testimony (which often would be trifling) may be left to the jury; and courts have usually made, no objection to this policy.””
    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.