Book v. Datema’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 2012
2 federal appellate · 10 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 Warren v. Marsh · Mathews v. Beyer · 130 Ohio St. 486 - Freas v. Sullivan · Olson v. Hodges · Harbor v. Campbell
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The general rule is that the record of a conviction or acquittal in a criminal prosecution is not admissible in evidence in a civil action to establish the truth of the facts on which it was rendered. * * * However, an exception to this rule is that the record in a criminal case showing a plea of guilty is admissible in a subsequent civil action against the accused arising out of the same offense, as his deliberate declaration or admission against interest.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Steel v. Downs · Lee v. Small““321.489 Record inadmissible in a civil action. No record of the conviction of any person for any violation of this chapter shall be admissible as evidence in any court in any civil action.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Berding v. Thada
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.