Dendy v. Cockerham’s Empirical Analysis
1935
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
October 1941
most recently cited
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Wininger v. Ft. Worth & Denver City Railway Co. · Hill v. Hoeldtke · Johnson v. Breckenridge-Stephens Title Co. · Morton Salt Co. v. Lybrand
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘ “ If, discarding all adverse evidence, and giving credit to all evidence favorable to the plaintiff, and indulging every legitimate conclusion favorable to the plaintiff which might have been drawn from the facts proved, a jury might have found in favor of the plaintiff.” Dendy v. Cockerham et ux. (Tex.Civ.App.) 82 S.W.2d 756, 758 . “ ‘To the same effect are the holdings in Texas Employers’ Ins. Ass’n v. Ritchie (Tex.Civ.App.) 75 S.W.2d 942 ; Jackson v. Langford (Tex.Civ.App.) 60 S.W.2d 265 ; Gross v. Shell Pipe Line Corporation, (Tex.Civ.App.) 48 S.W.2d 377 , and authorities cited.’ Panhandle & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Jones, Tex.Civ.App., 105 S.W.2d 443, 444 .””
2 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.