Christ v. Wempe’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
61 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently February 2014 · most notably Oxtoby v. McGowan (1982), Harper v. Higgs (1961)
61 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 Williams v. State · Kelly v. Huber Baking Co. · People's Drug Stores, Inc. v. Windham · Lahr v. Tirrill · Hickory Transfer Co. v. Nezbed
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.
“'“Such evidence is forbidden by public policy, since it would disclose the secrets of the jury room and ¡afford an opportunity for fraud and perjury. It would open ¡such ¡a door for tampering with weak ¡and indiscreet men that it would render all verdicts insecure,; and, therefore;, the law has wisely guarded against all ¡such testimony ¡and has considered it unworthy of ¡notice. It would be a most pernicious practice, and • in its consequences dangerous to this much valued mode of trial, to permit a verdict, openly and solemnly declared in the 'Court, to be 'subverted by going behind it and inquiring into the secrets of the jury room.” See also Christ v. Wempe, 219 Md. 627, 640-43 , 150 A. 2d 918 (1959); Williams v. State, supra.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The information contained in the affidavit of the court clerk presents a different situation because it emanates from one not a member of the jury panel and is based on his own knowledge. Such evidence should be received and considered by the court in ruling on a motion for a new trial.... [The trial judge] did consider the facts stated in the affidavit to be true but decided that the irregularity therein described was insufficient to justify a new trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The majority of courts hold that the mere fact that a vehicle skids or slides on a slippery highway does not of itself constitute evidence of negligence and that in such cases the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur does not apply.” (p. 635.)”
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.