Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 83 GA 565 - Phillips v. Taber

Phillips v. Taber’s Empirical Analysis

1889

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
1
states following
February 2020
most recently cited

38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably Holmes v. Langston & Woodson (1900), Hurt Building Inc. v. Atlanta Trust Co. (1935)

38 state decisions

90188918901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Lumpkin v. Respess · Ferrill v. Marks · Beall v. Marietta Paper Mill Co. · Peacock v. Usry · Massey v. Allen

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

  1. “show to the court that he had a meritorious defence to the action, and show by his affidavit or the affidavits of others, such facts as would render it improbable or at least doubtful that the plaintiff would be entitled to recover. It is not enough for him to swear that he has a meritorious defence to the action, without going further and showing the facts upon which such defence is based, so that the court can determine for itself whether, if the verdict and judgment were set aside, the result might be different on the next trial; because it would be useless to set aside a verdict and go through another trial to have the same verdict rendered by the jury.”
    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.