Wolf v. Mahan’s Empirical Analysis
1882
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently December 1987
14 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.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The reason of the rule forbidding a new trial for the purpose of admitting cumulative testimony does not apply where the party has had no fair opportunity to procure and adduce evidence on an issue raised by his adversary for the first time, during the trial, by the introduction of evidence which could not be anticipated. The reason of the rule is that public policy, looking to the finality of trials, requires that parties be held to diligence in preparing their cases, and that they shall not be allowed a second trial because they mistook the amount of testimony requisite. Powell v. Jones, 42 Barb. 30 [ 42 N.Y. 30 ]. But the policy which seeks to limit continued litigation does not apply where a party has had no fair opportunity to present his side of the case — no real day in court. In discussing this subject, Chief Justice Wheeler said: ‘It is desirable that there should be an end of' litigation with as little delay and expense as possible, consistently with the great end of litigation — a correct decision of causes according to their real merits'; but it should always be sought in subordination to the great end to be attained.’ Mitchell v. Bass, 26 Tex. [372] 377.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““It is desirable that there should be an end of litigation with as little delay and expense as possible, consistently with the great end of litigation—a correct decision of causes according to their real merits; but it should always be sought in subordination to the great end to be attained.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Horne v. Stockton
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.