Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 214 SW2D 824 - Goree v. Hansen

Goree v. Hansen’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
November 1975
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently November 1975

8 state decisions

501948195019601970decided

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 Rayburn v. Giles · Long-Bell Lumber Co. v. Bynum · Associates Inv. Co. v. Thomas · Texas Bus Lines v. Whatley · Muran v. Muran

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

  1. ““In the absence of a conclusion of an appellate court that the jury finding is so overwhelmingly contrary to a preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and the probative evidence adduced is conflicting, it is the accepted rule that when a jury decides upon one theory of the conflict, all the testimony will, be construed in the light most favorable to the verdict, and if there is competent testimony of , probative value found the appellate court may, not set the verdict aside and substitute its own-finding for that of the jury. Long-Bell Lumber Co. v. Bynum, 138 Tex. 267 , 158 S.W.2d 290 ; Rayburn v. Giles, Tex.Civ.App., 182 S.W.2d 9 , writ refused; Associates Inv. Co. ,v. Thomas, Tex.Civ.App., 210 S.W.2d 413 ; Muran v. Muran, Tex.Civ.App., 210 S.W.2d 617 ; Texas Bus Lines v. Whatley [Tex.Civ.App.], 210 S.W.2d 626 , writ refused NRE.””
    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.