Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 387 SW2D 383 - Brawley v. Bowen

Brawley v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
1
states following
May 1996
most recently cited

55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently May 1996 · most notably Landreth v. Reed (1978), Pharo v. Chambers County, Tex. (1996)

55 state decisions

2601965197019801990decided

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 Barrington v. Duncan · Maryland Casualty Co. v. Hearks · Monkey Grip Rubber Co. v. Walton · Putman v. Lazarus · State v. Wair

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

  1. ““Where no express findings are filed, it is presumed on appeal that the trial court found all controverted facts in support of its judgment overruling the motion and that no misconduct occurred. Putman v. Lazarus, 156 Tex. 154 , 293 S.W.2d 493 (1956); Monkey Grip Rubber Co. v. Walton, 122 Tex. 185 , 53 S.W.2d 770 (1932); Milstead v. Aynesworth, 341 S.W.2d 942 (Tex.Civ.App., 1960, writ refused, n. r. e.). If the evidence offered at the hearing on the motion for new trial is conflicting as to whether or not misconduct occurred, the decision of the trial court on the question is binding on appeal. Barrington v. Duncan, 140 Tex. 510 , 169 S.W.2d 462 (1943); Maryland Casualty Co. v. Hearks, 144 Tex. 317 , 190 S.W.2d 62 (1945); State v. Wair, 163 Tex. 69 , 351 S.W.2d 878 (1961).””
    3 later decisions 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.