Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 SW 327 - Bean v. Hinson

Bean v. Hinson’s Empirical Analysis

1921

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
3
states following
January 1961
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1961

5 state decisions

3019211930194019501960decided

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 Ackerman v. Huff · Yoe & Harris v. Montgomery · Lewis v. Smith · Wyckoff v. . Queens County Ferry Co. · H. & T. C. R'y Co. v. McNamara

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

  1. ““Under the Texas appellate practice the higher courts have uniformly refused to enter into investigation of testimony upon an assignment of error which goes no further than to state that the verdict or judgment or matter complained of is not supported by the evidence. The assignment should state in what respect the evidence does not support the verdict or finding — the particulars in which .the evidence is insufficient — and not require .the court to examine the whole statement of facts to see if it cannot discover some defect •or weakness which the party complaining has not pointed out. or called specifically to the ■court’s attention.””
    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.