Moore v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1930
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently July 1987
13 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 Holland v. Nimitz · Holland v. Nimitz · Noa Spears and Wife v. City of San Antonio · State v. Bridgman · Browder v. Memphis Independent School District
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is quite true, * * * that ordinarily a question of the admissibility of evidence is not one of substantive law, and the Supreme Court might not grant a writ of error where such a question alone is presented; but once the court examines an application and concludes an error of substantive law has been committed, then it follows, under the very language of the statute, its jurisdiction then extends “to all questions of law arising” in the case. The case of Holland v. Nimitz, 111 Texas 419 , 232 S.W. 298 , 239 S.W. 185 , shows the difference between the statute as it now exists and the act of 1913.” (Court’s emphasis).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.