Shafer v. Bull’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The second contention of Shafer Brothers [the ap pellants] is that it was error to fail to grant their fourth requested instruction dealing with contributory-negligence. The only exception made to the denial of this instruction was as follows: ‘Shafer Brothers further except to the failure of the Court to grant their request for instruction Nos. 3, 4 and 5.’ The issue thus raised is not properly reviewable. We have held that a reference by a party to an instruction by number, unless accompanied by an objection stating distinctly the portion, or omission, or failure to instruct to which he objects and the specific ground of his objection, is not a sufficient compliance with Rule 554 d, Belt’s Wharf v. Internat. Corp., 213 Md. 585 , 132 A. 2d 588 (1957).” ( 233 Md. at 75 , 194 A. 2d at 792 .)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jones v. Federal Paper Board Co.