Stitt v. Huidekopers’s Empirical Analysis
84 U.S. 384 · 1873
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 4 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1980 · most notably West India Oil Co. v. Compania Transatlantica De Barcelona (1924), The Richmond (1902)
18 federal appellate · 4 district · 12 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.
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.
““We are of opinion that the charge was a sound exposition of a recognized rule of evidence of frequent application, and that the reason of the rule, as stated in the charge, dispenses with the need of further comment on it here.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““That it is a rule of presumptions'that ordinarily a witness who testifies to an affirmative is to be preferred to one who testifies to a negative, because he who testifies to a negative may have forgotten.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.