Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 92 N.H. 81 - Fine v. Parella

Fine v. Parella’s Empirical Analysis

1942

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
4
states following
May 1978
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently May 1978

19 state decisions

801942195019601970decided

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 McCarthy v. Souther · Tullgren v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co. · Piechuck v. Magusiak · Carbone v. Boston & Maine Railroad · Woodman v. Peck

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

  1. ““The rule in Piechuck v. Magusiak, supra, remains in force. The case was decided in 1926 and the general increase of motor vehicle liability insurance since then as matter of common knowledge might serve to make evidence of it less likely to provoke prejudice. But the converse of evidence of no insurance is so interrelated with that of carriage of insurance that the evidence in either situation ought not to be unnecessarily received. It remains as immaterial with some chance of its use for £a legally harmful purpose’ (Piechuck v. Magusiak, supra, 431). It does no good and may do harm.” (Italics ours.)”
    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.