Lumpkins v. McPhee’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently December 1990 · most notably Duke City Lumber Company, Inc. v. Terrel (1975), Landavazo v. Sanchez (1990)
60 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 Schreyer v. Platt · Frear v. Roberts · Pavletich v. Pavletich · Marchbanks v. McCullough · Shaw v. Board of Education
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘When all the evidence is in, fraud being the issue, * * * if the greatest effect it has on the mind of the fact finder is to leave it confronted by a question mark on the vital issue, was there fraud? — then there is not that type of evidence which alone is to be deemed substantial and a finding of fraud cannot be supported. “ ‘On the other hand, if, when the evidence is all in the scales, they tilt instantly to the affirmative of the issue of fraud charged; if, the balancing of the scales proclaims an affirmative in unmistakable tones, leaving in the fact finder’s mind an abiding conviction that the charge made is true, then such evidence may with all propriety be called clear, strong and convincing and it is. substantial.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McLean v. Paddock““The evidence in support of a finding of fraud is not deemed substantial, if it is not clear, strong and convincing. * * * and where it is evenly balanced or barely tips the scales in a party’s favor, that is barely preponderates, it is not so supported. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McLean v. Paddock““ * * * The evidence in support of a finding of fraud is not deemed substantial, if it is not clear, strong and, convincing.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dungan v. Smith
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.