Stigall v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1935
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
June 1949
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Truax v. Commonwealth · Cargill v. Commonwealth · Williams v. Commonwealth · Fenley Model Dairy v. Secuskie
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This evidence having been introduced in rebuttal, it may have been proper for the court to have admonished the jury of its purpose; but the record does not disclose that appellant asked the court to admonish the. jury, and for that reason appellant cannot now complain. The court is under no obligation to admonish a jury with respect to the purpose of evidence, when it is competent for any purpose, unless requested to do so by the complaining party.””
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.