Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 40 Ariz. 109 - Murphy v. Russell

Murphy v. Russell’s Empirical Analysis

1932

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
May 2013
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably Bradshaw v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (1988), Cullison v. City of Peoria (1978)

28 state decisions

100193219401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Stewart v. Sonneborn · Ball v. Rawles · Brown v. Selfridge · Eastin v. Bank of Stockton · Runo v. Williams

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

  1. ““Whether a given state of facts constitutes probable cause is always a question of law to be determined by the court, and it cannot relieve itself of this burden by casting it upon the jury, (citations omitted) The only function of the jury in this respect is to determine what the actual facts were. If, therefore, taking the evidence in the strongest manner in favor of plaintiff, the court is of the opinion that as a matter of law the facts so proved constitute probable cause for the prosecution, it is its duty to instruct the jury to return a verdict in favor of the defendant. (citations omitted) If, however, the evidence is conflicting, so that on one conclusion as to the facts drawn therefrom probable cause exists, while from another it does not, it is then for the jury to determine the true state of facts and to apply the law as laid down by the court to those facts, (citations omitted).” 40 Ariz. at 112 , 9 P.2d at 1021 .”
    2 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.