Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 92 ALA 630 - Cobb v. Malone

Cobb v. Malone’s Empirical Analysis

1890

Citation profile

775
cited by 775 later decisions
1
states following
September 2004
most recently cited

773 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 775 later decisions — most recently September 2004 · most notably 539 So. 2d 218 - Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby (1989), Fuller v. State (1959)

773 state decisions

1490189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Nooe's v. Garner's Adm'r · Hicks v. Stone · Hall v. Page · Peck v. Thompson

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

  1. “. . . the decision of the trial court, refusing to grant a new trial on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence, or that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, will not be reversed, unless, after allowing all reasonable presumptions of its correctness, the preponderance of the evidence against the verdict is so decided as to clearly convince the court that it is wrong and unjust.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “". . . the decision of the trial court, refusing to grant a new trial on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence, or that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, will not be reversed, unless, after allowing all reasonable presumptions of its correctness, the preponderance of the evidence against the verdict is so decided as to clearly convince the court that it is wrong and unjust." * * * * * * "[The trial judge] has heard and seen the witnesses testify, observed their tone and demeanor, and noticed their candor, or convenient failure of memory, to avoid impeachment, or for other improper purpose. The appellate court, possessing none of these aids and advantages, and receiving the evidence on paper only, is less qualified to determine what evidence is unworthy of belief, or what weight should be given to that which has been rejected by the jury, and may give undue weight to the testimony of some of the witnesses."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““When the, ground of the motion is the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict, or that -it is' contrary to the evidence, the substance of which is reduced to writing, a general assignment- is sufficient. But when the .reason is. that the verdict is contrary to the law, or that .errors of law occurred during the trial, a general assignment will be disregarded; the respects in which the verdict is contrary to law, or the errors of law complained of, should be specified, so as to direct the court’s attention to the alleged erroneous rulings.””
    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.