Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 213 F.2d 485 - Baldwin v. Warwick

Baldwin v. Warwick’s Empirical Analysis

213 F.2d 485 · 1954

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently March 2012

16 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

901954196019701980199020002010decided

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 Southern Pac. Co. v. Guthrie

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

  1. ““In action by real estate dealer for damages on ground that defendants, pursuant to conspiracy between them, had defrauded dealer by trick and device inducing amnesia in him by means of drugged drinks with result that he had sustained gambling losses, testimony of other real estate men showing similar experiences they had had with defendants was admissible for limited purpose of showing existence of overall scheme on defendants’ part.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Their testimony would appear to have been properly admitted for the limited purpose of showing the existence of an overall scheme.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “condition a denial thereof upon remittitur of an important percentage of the amount awarded as punitive damages.”
    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.