Moore v. Grantham’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently December 2003 · most notably EI Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Robinson (1996), Nethery v. State (1985)
2 federal appellate · 36 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 State v. Oakley · Lewis v. Southmore Savings Association · King v. Skelly · Slaughter v. Abilene State School · Gray v. Bird
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It has long been the law of this State that an expert’s opinion may not be based solely on the statements or reports of third persons, unless those statements are properly in evidence and the opinion is sought through hypothetical questions. (Citations omitted) While the courts have adopted a more liberal approach in allowing an expert’s opinion testimony to be based partially on hearsay (citations omitted) this court has yet to adopt a rule permitting an expert’s opinion testimony to be based solely on hearsay.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Further the opinions specifically declared, in rejecting the contention that certain expert opinion testimony should have been excluded as hearsay, that: “Dr. Yeager also testified from his own personal knowledge. An expert, when qualified as such, may give his opinion and relate sources which are customarily and usually relied upon by experts in the field upon which he partially relied in forming his opinion, together with his own personal knowledge, which support or tend to support that opinion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In permitting the doctor’s testimony into evidence, we declared our understanding of the state of the law in relation to expert opinion testimony: “Texas courts have followed the general rule that where it appears a witness’ testimony is predicated both upon personal knowledge and upon hearsay, his testimony is admissible.” 561 S.W.2d at 791 . [Emphasis added.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lovell v. DeHoney
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.