Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 252 SW 151 - Chapman v. Kellogg

Chapman v. Kellogg’s Empirical Analysis

1923

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
1
states following
October 1976
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently October 1976 · most notably Woodward v. Ortiz (1951), Switzer v. Smith (1927)

4 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

120192319301940195019601970decided

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 Choate v. San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Co. · Lee v. International & Great Northern Railway Co. · Hardy v. Beaty · Martin v. Burns, Walker Co. · Murchison v. White, 54 Tex. 78 (Tex. 1880)

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

  1. ““We think, as already stated, that the findings of the jury have considerable basis in the record, and we cannot recommend an affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals. On the other hand, we cannot recommend an affirmance of the trial court’s judgment. The finding that there is no evidence in the record to sustain the trial court’s judgment ordinarily includes the lesser finding that said judgment is against the weight of the evidence and that the same court would have remanded the case because of the insufficiency of the evidence, if that had been necessary. Such a remand is binding on the Supreme Court. * *”
    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.