Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 80 Ariz. 398 - Mitchell v. Emblade

Mitchell v. Emblade’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
7
states following
June 1991
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 4 district · 30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently June 1991 · most notably Felder v. United States (1976), 2 Ariz. App. 181 - Salinas v. Kahn (1965)

8 federal appellate · 4 district · 30 state decisions

20019561960197019801990decided

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 Wilkerson v. McCarthy · 5 Ill. 2d 135 - Hall v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co. · Dempsey v. Thompson · Clinkscales v. Carver · Clayton 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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the case should be tried on the issues and presented to the jury with a correct measure of damages, of which the incident [sic] of income tax has no part.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “what objection can there be for plaintiff’s counsel to state that the expense of trial is not provided for in the instruction concerning damages, that the cost of medical witnesses is not paid by the defendant, that the expense of taking depositions, as well as court reporting at the trial, must be borne by the individual litigants, that the fees of plaintiffs attorney are not recognized as an element, [and] that the defendant can deduct any award it pays from its income and excess profits tax return.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ * * * Speed highway signs are for the purpose of advising the driving public and a driver is entitled to rely on their authenticity. He cannot be expected nor required to investigate and determine whether such signs are placed there in the regular course of legal procedure. Cases cited. * * * ””
    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.