Collier v. Young’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 2016
5 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.
Relationships
Relies on Allen v. United States · Bruce v. Chestnut Farms-Chevy Chase Dairy · Hoagland v. Chestnut Farms Dairy, Inc. · Woods v. Gettelfinger · Grant v. Williams
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The Foreman. Well, we did not reach a verdict either for the plaintiff or defendant due to the fact that most of us conceded to each other that there isn’t enough evidence brought forth. “The Court. Not enough evidence to reach a verdict one way or the other? “The Foreman. That is right, sir, that is the conclusion we came to, your Honor. “The Court. Well, do you think by further deliberations or further instructions or clarification of instructions that the Court has given that you might reach a verdict? I have in mind possibly releasing you to return tomorrow morning to continue your deliberations. If you think it would be possible to reach a verdict, why, I would be glad to * * * and continue your deliberations. “The Foreman. If you say, still so instruct, your Honor, we will be glad to come back tomorrow and try again.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““ * * * The foreman’s announcement, above quoted, was not the rendition of a verdict, and could not have been regarded as deciding anything. It was merely a statement that no-verdict had been reached, and this statement the judge had a right to treat as merely tentative. “It was certainly within the discretion of the judge to permit the jury to deliberate further and give them proper instructions accordingly. Bruce v. Chestnut Farms-Chevy Chase Dairy, 75 U.S.App.D.C. 192 , 126 F.2d 224 ; Hoagland v. Chestnut Farms Dairy, 63 App.D.C. 357 , 72 F.2d 729 . There is nothing whatever in the record before us to suggest that coercion or pressure of any kind was exerted on-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.