Kellogg v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis
1914
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently November 1994
19 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 Biering v. First National Bank · State v. Pomeroy · Stanley v. Smith · Heldt v. Webster · Ivey v. State
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“' “The instruction as to the inference that might be drawn from evidence showing want of probable cause was misleading, and therefore erroneous. While it is true that malice may be inferred from want of probable cause, it is not a necessary- inference and is never an inference of law. Want of probable cause is a fact to be considered by the jury with other facts in determining the presence or absence of malice.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““It is error for the court to single out a certain fact or circumstance and instruct the jury as to the legal inference to be deduced from that particular fact to the exclusion of other facts.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cade v. Thompson
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.