Halbrook v. Halbrook’s Empirical Analysis
1960
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
January 1973
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Medlock v. Jones · Olmstead v. Hill
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We are not willing to say that the circuit court abused its broad discretion in the matter. Our pertinent cases are cited and discussed in a comment appearing at 4 Ark. L. Rev. 60 . There the authors point out that a motion of this kind is not favored by the courts, owing to the manifest disadvantages in allowing the losing litigant a second trial after he has been afforded a fair opportunity to present his proof at the original hearing. Before granting sneh a motion the trial court should be convinced, among other things, that an injustice has been done, that the newly found evidence is not merely cumulative to that produced at the first trial, that the proof was not discoverable through the exercise of due diligence, and that the additional testimony will probably change the result.””
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.