Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 57 U.S. 38 - Frederic Conrad v. David Griffey

Frederic Conrad v. David Griffey’s Empirical Analysis

57 U.S. 38 · 1853

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
October 1986
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 1 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1986 · most notably Mattox v. United States (1895), The Charles Morgan (1885)

16 federal appellate · 1 district · 9 state decisions

6018531860187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Weinzorpflin v. State · Doe v. Reagan · Kimball & Rowe v. Davis & Brown · Everson v. Carpenter

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

  1. “"[A] witness cannot be impeached by showing that he had made contradictory statements from those sworn to, unless on his examination he was asked whether he had not made such statements to the individuals by whom the proof was expected to be given. * * This rule is founded upon common sense, and is essential to protect the character of a witness. His memory is refreshed by the necessary inquiries, which enables him to explain the statements referred to, and show they were made under a mistake, or that there was no discrepancy between them and his testimony."”
    2 later decisions 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.