State ex rel. Wise v. Chand’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

96 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 96 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In a trial before a jury, the court’s participation by questioning or comment must be scrupulously limited, lest the court, consciously or unconsciously, indicate to the jury its opinion on the evidence or on the credibility of a witness.””

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 93 Ohio App. 3d 672 - State v. Perkins · J. Norman Stark Co., L.P.A. v. Santora, Unpublished Decision (11-10-2004)

2. ““Prosecutions of complaints under Sections 3111.01 to 3111.24, inclusive, Revised Code, relating to bastardy, are, unless specified otherwise therein, governed by the procedure provided for the trial of civil cases. (Paragraph one of the syllabus of Taylor v. Scott, 168 Ohio St. 391 , followed.) “The complainant in a bastardy action may, pursuant to the provisions of Section 2317.07, Revised Code, call the defendant as if under cross-examination.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 68 Ohio App. 2d 95 - Sheppard v. Mack

3. “In a jury trial, where the intensity, tenor, range and persistence of the court's interrogation of a witness can reasonably indicate to the jury the court's opinion as to the credibility of the witness or the weight to be given to his testimony, the interrogation is prejudicially erroneous”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. West