Upton v. Harrison’s Empirical Analysis
68 F.2d 232 · 1934
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently March 1987
10 federal appellate ·
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 Fairmount Glass Works v. Cub Fork Coal Co. · Chapman v. Barney · Liverpool Steam Co v. Insurance Co of North America · Perry v. Kelford Coca-Cola Bottling Co. · Board of Drainage Com'rs of Pender County Drainage Dist. No. 4 v. Lafayette Southside Bank of St. Louis
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[MJisconduct of a juror during the trial, if known to the party at the time of its occurrence, and not made the subject of a motion to the Court, is waived. A party cannot know, during the trial, a fatal objection arising from the misconduct of a juror upon the trial, and keep silence, and take advantage of it in the event of an adverse verdict. He is not permitted to ‘speculate upon the chances of a verdict.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Nolan v. Nolan“sit silently by and take chances on a favorable verdict and then complain when it turned out to be unfavorable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cooper v. Dyke
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.