Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 210 F.1d 442 - Young v. Corrigan

Young v. Corrigan’s Empirical Analysis

210 F. 442 · 1914

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
January 1931
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 1931

11 federal appellate · 1 district ·

60191419201930decided

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 Simmons v. United States · Allis v. United States · Isaacs v. United States · Hickory v. United States · Humes v. United States

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. ““It was not error for the trial court in the charge to express an opinion relative to plaintiff’s failure to produce a certain witness, where the jury was given to understand that it was not bound by such opinion. The jury was sufficiently advised in this regard. The comments criticized did not trench upon the province of the jury, or go beyond the limits of reasonable expression of opinion.””
    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.