Balle v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1932
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently December 1991
6 federal appellate · 18 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 120 Ohio St. 154 - Pavilonis v. Valentine · 97 Cal. App. 731 - Daniel v. Asbill · Burrows v. Likes · Haarstrich v. Oregon Short Line R. Co. · Martin v. Schiska
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The permitting of a view by the jury of articles or property involved in litigation or of the making of experiments- of the kind proposed outside of the court is a matter so largely in the discretion of the trial court that its decision will not be disturbed except for palpable abuse. Konold v. Rio Grande Western Ry. Co., 21 Utah 379 , 60 P. 1021 , 81 Am. St. Rep. 693 ; 22 C. J. 767-790 ; 3 Jones on Evidence (2d Ed.) 401-410. There was no abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court in refusing to permit a view of the car or a demonstration of the car and its occupancy by the five persons.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Roedl“[Pjlaintiff in a personal injury or death case, if acting in good faith for the purpose of ascertaining the qualifications of jurors, and not merely for the purpose of informing them that defendant is insured, may in one form or another inquire of prospective jurors on voir dire examination with reference to their interest in or connection with insurance companies.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““To what extent, if at all, counsel for plaintiff may examine a juror with reference to his connection either as stockholder, officer, or employee, or debtor or creditor in an insurance company, which is defending a case pursuant to a contract of insurance with the defendant, is a question of first impression in this court.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Saltas v. Affleck
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.