Clark v. Hudson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 101 state decisions

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

1. ““The last point to be considered is the exclusion of the testimony of Dr. Palmer, orthopedic surgeon, of what Dr. Stickley, radiologist, not a witness in the case, had told him about the plaintiff’s injuries. Dr. Palmer had some x-rays taken of plaintiff’s back and requested Dr. Stickley to give him an opinion with respect to these x-rays and interpret them for him. This Dr. Stickley did, and his written opinion was a part of Dr. Palmer’s files as a part of the history of the case. On seasonable obj ection by the plaintiff the court excluded this testimony as hearsay. The holding was proper. The recent case of Prince v. Lowe, 263 Ala. 410 , 82 So.2d 606 , settled the law in this state that testimony of this character as well as testimony of what a board or committee of examiners might have decided with respect to a person’s injuries was hearsay. * * * ”— Clark v. Hudson, supra. “ * * * Dr. Nolan, over plaintiffs’ objection, testified to an opinion expressed by Dr. Gay during consultation concerning the child’s condition that ‘Dr. Gay was of the opinion that the child had polio.’ The question of the admissibility of such evidence was recently considered in the case of Clark v. Hudson, 265 Ala. 630, 635 , 93 So.2d 138 , where it was held that such evidence is hearsay and not admissible. See, also, Prince v. Lowe, 263 Ala. 410 , 82 So.2d 606 .” — Pappa v. Bonner, supra.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 42 Ala. App. 261 - Bliley v. State