Lehmann v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 54 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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The general rule in this State is that if one party calls an adverse party as a witness, he is bound by his adversary’s testimony, unless it is contradicted or discredited. See Maszczenski v. Myers, 212 Md. 346, 352 , 129 A. 2d 109 , and cases therein cited, construing Code (1957), Article 35, Section 9 (the cases prior to Maszczenski dealing with that Section as enacted by § 4 of Chapter 109 of the Acts of 1864 as it stood prior to its amendment by Chapter 380 of the Acts of 1939), and Proctor Electric Co. v. Zink, 217 Md. 22, 32-35 , 141 A. 2d 721 . However, as is pointed out in the Proctor Electric Co. case ( 217 Md. at 32, 33 ), the cases referred to ‘are not to be interpreted as meaning that a party is bound by each and every statement made by an adverse witness called by him,’ and the ‘testimony of a witness may be contradicted or discredited by circumstances as well as by statements of other witnesses, and a jury is not bound to accept a witness’ testimony as true if it contains improbabilities, or if there are reasonable grounds for concluding that it is erroneous.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nizer v. Phelps