Gray v. Cooper’s Empirical Analysis
1927
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 1979
20 state decisions
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 Birmingham Electric Co. v. Cleveland · Montgomery & Eufaula Railway Co. v. Mallette · Birmingham Ry. L. & P. Co. v. Colbert · Tillery v. Walker · Birmingham Ry. L. & P. Co. v. Simpson
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Refused charge B, as follows: ‘If you believe the evidence, you cannot award the plaintiff more than nominal damages for loss of time from his business or occupation due to his injury’ — should have been given. The fact that plaintiff testified that he conducted the business as a furniture dealer; was the ‘only employee in the concern’; his duties required him to handle furniture; that he had not been able to go back to work; and indicated the time or duration of his absence, was not a compliance with the requirement for specific data on which to rest damages causing him to ‘lose time from his work,’ . . . . (emphasis added)”
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.