Halback v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis
261 F. 1007 · 1919
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1992
11 federal appellate · 4 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 John Stein v. William Bowman · Seeley v. Seeley · Goldsmith v. Valentine · Edwards v. Dismukes · Thomas v. Maddan
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Husband and wife, for or against each other, or concerning any communication made by one to the other during the marriage, whether called as a witness while that relation subsists or afterwards, but either shall be allowed to testify for the other in regard to any business transacted by the one for the other in the capacity of agent.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“was to remove grounds of incompetency, and not increase them. * * * Therefore a husband or wife, under this statute, can claim no greater privilege than existed at common law.”
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.