Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 55 F.2d 139 - Pullman Co. v. Hall

Pullman Co. v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis

55 F.2d 139 · 1932

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
3
states following
September 1991
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 1991

18 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

801932194019501960197019801990decided

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 Alford v. United States · Panama Co v. Johnson · Ayers v. Watson · Tla-Koo-Yel-Lee v. United States · Hall v. Weare

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

  1. “The rule is that for the purpose of impeaching the credibility of a witness he may be questioned as to misconduct, even as to collateral matters, which has a tendency to show his lack of honesty or truthfulness; the qualification of the rule being that the party questioning him is bound by his answers and may not contradict him with regard thereto. [Citing authorities.] It is said that it was within the discretion of the trial judge whether questions would be permitted as to acts of misconduct affecting credibility. We think, however, that the matter resting within the discretion of the judge is merely the extent to which such examination may be pursued. To refuse the right to examine at all with respect to such matters is reversible error.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “`The rule is that for the purpose of impeaching the credibility of a witness he may be questioned as to misconduct, even as to collateral matters, which has a tendency to show his lack of honesty or truthfulness; the qualification of the rule being that the party questioning him is bound by his answers and may not contradict him with regard thereto.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.