Smith v. Hale’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1992
6 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 Ward v. North American Rayon Corporation · Pulaski Rubber Co. v. Rolin
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Ward v. N.A. Rayon Corp., 211 Tenn. 535 , 366 S.W.2d 134 (1962), the court held that a chiropractor is competent to testify as an expert as to matters within the limited scope of his profession. The scope of the profession is defined in T.C.A. § 63-401 as the science of palpating, analyzing, and adjusting the articulations of the human spinal column and adjacent tissues by hand. In Ward the court observed that the chiropractor was competent to testify as to the nerve interference in Ward’s spine, the subluxa-tions of his vertebrae, and the abnormal curvature of the spine. He was also competent to express an opinion as to the probable causes and effects of these injuries.” 211 Tenn. at 547 , 366 S.W.2d at 139 .”
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.