Holcombe v. Whitaker’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Kilduff v. Adams, Inc. (1991), 493 So. 2d 1374 - Hammond v. City of Gadsden (1986)
2 federal appellate · 50 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 Airheart v. Green · Phillips v. Ashworth · Ala. Great Southern Railroad v. Sellers · Birmingham Electric Co. v. Thompson · 25 Ala. App. 540 - Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Hill
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here the wrong is willful rather than negligent, recovery may be had for the ordinary, natural, and proximate consequences though they consist of shame, humiliation, and mental anguish.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“'an intentional, unlawful offer to touch the person of another in a rude or angry manner under such circumstances as to create in the mind of the party alleging the assault a wellfounded fear of an imminent battery, coupled with the apparent present ability to effectuate the attempt, if not prevented.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"We cannot say, as a matter of law, that this was not sufficient to arouse an apprehension of harm or offensive conduct. We think it was a jury question, as was the question of whether the defendant had the apparent ability to effectuate the threatened act."”
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.