Ogea v. Jacobs’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently November 2015
24 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 Hickman v. Taylor · White v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad · Southern Railway Company v. Carl Talmadge Lanham · The Guilford National Bank of Greensboro, Administrator C.T.A., D.B.N., of the Estate of Joseph M. Coble, Deceased v. Southern Railway Company, and Third-Party v. Garland Batchelor, of the Estate of Annie J. Coble, Deceased, Third-Party · Frankenhauser v. Rizzo
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“attorney, surety, indemnitor, expert, or agent”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any books, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter. It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Acts 1976, No. 574 § 1."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Guy v. Tonglet“A mere showing of relevance is insufficient. To justify disclosure, a party must show the importance of the information to the preparation of his case, and the difficulty he will face in obtaining substantially equivalent information from other sources if production is denied. The clearest case for ordering production is when information is in the exclusive control of the opposing party. This is true, ... with respect to test results which cannot be duplicated. 4 Moore's Federal Practice, Par. 26-362 [3. 1].”
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.