Hohenstein v. Dodds’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 8 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Thus the witnesses were put in the position of weighing the facts upon which they based their opinions, as it is obviously impossible to assume as true facts that are in themselves contradictory. A question propounded in this way is fair neither to the witness nor to the jury. The rule is well stated in 3 Jones, Evidence (2 ed.) § 1324: “ CA question of such nature, calling upon the witness for a conclusion from all the evidence heard but without assuming any facts established thereby, is obnoxious, where the facts are in dispute, as permitting the witness to accept such of the evidence as he believes to be true and to reject such as he does not deem reliable. In effect, the question is, “Having heard the whole of the evidence, state your conclusions from that which you select as the basis of your judgment.” ’ -X- * * -X if “* * * It was reversible error to ask the expert witnesses to form an opinion based upon this testimony.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Baker v. MacGillis Gibbs Co.

2. ““There is no market value for diseased pigs. Minn.St.1941, § 614.-47, Mason St.1927, § 10450, provides : ‘Every owner or person having charge of any animal, knowing the same to have any infectious or contagious disease, or to have recently been exposed thereto, who shall sell or barter the same,’ shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Under these circumstances plaintiff’s pigs could have had no market value on May 29, 1940, in their diseased condition.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Nicholson v. Heiden