McKinney v. Widner’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
2 district · 7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jordan v. Johns · National Cordova Corp. v. City of Memphis · AM. NAT. BANK & TRUST CO., ETC. v. Clark · Sale v. Eichberg · 60 Tenn. App. 310 - Batey v. DH Overmyer Warehouse Company
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]his Court cannot accept the argument ... that, by disclaiming or failing to present a particular fact or theory supporting his action, a plaintiff may thereby reserve and preserve the disclaimed and unpresented fact or theory as an “ace in the hole” to be used as a ground for a second lawsuit based on such ground. To assent to plaintiffs insistence would be to condone piecemeal presentation of suits and defenses at the whim of the parties. Such is not the policy of our law.”
3 later decisions 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.