Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 6 F.1d 844 - Pool v. C., B. & Q. R.

Pool v. C., B. & Q. R.’s Empirical Analysis

6 F. 844 · 1881

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
4
states following
July 2013
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 2013

1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

2018811890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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

  1. “■‘There is no right more sacred than the right to a fair trial. There is no wrong more grievous than the negation of that right. An unfair trial adds a deadly pang to the bitterness of defeat. Now, ilie human mind is constituted so that what one himself publicly declares touching any controversy is much more potent in biasing liis judgment and confirming his predilections than similar declarations which he may hear uttered by another person. When most men commit themselves publicly to any fact, theory, or judgment, they are too apt -to stand by their own public declarations in defiance of evidence. This pride of opinion and constancy belong to human nature. Where, therefore, a juryman talks outside of the jury room about a case pending and undetermined before him, he gives the clearest evidence that he is not an impartial juror. The very discussion of any matter anywhere by a juror elsewhere than in the jury room tends to the forming of false impressions and prejudgments. Nor will it do for a moment to accept the statement of the juror that what he has said or heard has not affected his judgment or influenced his verdict. Almost any juror, when detected in such misconduct, and arraigned for it, will disclaim the influence upon his own mind of what he has uttered in violation of his duty.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.