Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 349 SW2D 780 - State v. Finch

State v. Finch’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
December 2006
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2006

8 state decisions

4019611970198019902000decided

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 Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Canty · Southland-Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Richardson · Cortimeglia v. Davis · Scholfield Gear & Pulley Co. v. Scholfield · McCoy v. Jordan

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

  1. ““Rule 294, T.R.C.P., declares that either party shall have the right to have the jury polled. It prescribes the method for the poll and states the question which the judge must ask. That question is the simple one: ‘Is this your verdict?’ When the court propounded that question to Mrs. Stannus, she responded that it was her verdict. The question is clear and simple, and is easily understood by any person qualified to serve on a jury. It is capable of an affirmative or negative answer, and that is all the judge needs to determine. Rule 294 does not authorize a poll to determine whether a juror is hesitant or enthusiastic about the verdict. The question seeks to determine whether the verdict is the juror’s at the time the court asks the question. Wheeler v. Oxford, Tex.Civ.App., 321 S.W.2d 188 ; Wells v. Lone Star S. S. Co,, Tex.Civ.App., 1 S.W.2d 925 ; Leverett v. St. Louis, S. F. & T. R. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 266 S.W. 589 ; 71 A.L.R.2d 643 . At that time, and up to the time the court announced that it received the verdict, any juror may withdraw his verdict. Republic Ins. Co. v. Hale, Tex.Com.App., 128 Tex. 616 , 99 S.W.2d 989 ; Lee v. Galbreath, Tex.Civ.App., 234 S.W.2d 91 .””
    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.