Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 91 F.2d 434 - Elzig v. Gudwangen

Elzig v. Gudwangen’s Empirical Analysis

91 F.2d 434 · 1937

Citation profile

147
cited by 147 later decisions
3
states following
April 1972
most recently cited

127 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 147 later decisions — most recently April 1972 · most notably Solomon Dehydrating Company, Incorporated v. Clarence R. Guyton, Central Greyhound Lines, Incorporated, and the Greyhound Corporation (1961), Standard Acc. Ins. v. Winget (1952)

127 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

74019371940195019601970decided

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 Gunning v. Cooley · Pennsylvania Co v. Chamberlain · Fairmount Glass Works v. Cub Fork Coal Co. · Chesapeake Ry Co v. Martin · Quock Ting v. United States

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

  1. ““We are required to determine whether there is any substantial evidence upon which the verdicts for the plaintiffs could properly be based. For the decision of that question, we must assume as established all the facts that the evidence supporting the plaintiffs’ claims reasonably tends to prove and that there should be drawn in the plaintiffs’ favor all the inferences fairly deducible from such facts. * * * We must also give effect to the rule that issues that depend upon the credibility of witnesses, and the effect or weight of evidence are to be decided by the jury”. Elzig v. Gudwangen, 8 Cir., 91 F.2d 434, 439 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Gentlemen, you are the sole judges of the credibility of the witnesses and of the weight and value to be given to their testimony. In passing upon' the credibility of any witness you have the right to take into consideration his conduct and demeanor upon the witness stand, his interest, if any, in the outcome of the case, the consistency of statements made by him upon the witness stand with statements made at other times and places as shown by the evidence in the case; the probability or lack of probability that his statements are true. All of these things you will take into consideration in passing upon the credibility of any witness. If you believe that any witness wilfully has sworn falsely to any material fact in testimony you are at liberty to disregard the whole or any part of that witness’ testimony and you will give to the testimony of each witness just that weight and value you believe it is entitled to receive.””
    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.