State v. McLennan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is only where the testimony points to a definite conclusion and to no other that the court is authorized to say to the jury that it ‘tends’ to prove anything. If the conclusion to be drawn from the circumstance in question is equivocal, it is for the jury alone to say what influence and what direction shall be accorded to the evidence on the point. What is here written on this point is not in conflict with State v. Brown, 28 Or. 147, 163 ( 41 Pac. 1042 ), Coos Bay R. R. Co. v. Siglin, 34 Or. 80, 84 ( 53 Pac. 504 ), and Smitson v. Southern Pacific Co., 37 Or. 74, 104 ( 60 Pac. 907 ), where it was decided, in substance, that under proper circumstances the court may say to the jury that there is testimony ‘tending to prove’ certain things. In those cases the evidence, if believed, had no double or treble significance as the testimony under consideration here.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Keelen