Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 97 Mont. 1 - Morton v. Mooney

Morton v. Mooney’s Empirical Analysis

1934

Citation profile

80
cited by 80 later decisions
8
states following
December 2000
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 76 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently December 2000 · most notably 112 Cal. App. 2d 638 - Estate of Teed (1952), 9 Cal. 2d 409 - Herbert v. Lankershim (1937)

2 federal appellate · 76 state decisions

21019341940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Grand Trunk Ry Co of Canada v. Ives · Casey v. Northern Pacific Ry. Co. · Heckaman v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. · Black v. Martin · Grant v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co.

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

  1. ““While the jurors are the sole judges of the facts, the question as to whether or not there is substantial evidence in support of the plaintiff’s case is always a question of law for the court (Grant v. Chicago etc. Ry. Co., 78 Mont. 97 [ 252 Pac. 382 ], and in determining this question ‘the credulity of courts is not to be deemed commensurate with the facility and vehemence with which a witness swears. “It is a wild conceit that any court of justice is bound by mere swearing. It is swearing creditably that is to conclude the judgment.” ’ ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"Substantial evidence is such as will convince reasonable men and on which such reasonable men may not reasonably differ as to whether it establishes the plaintiff's case, and, if all reasonable men must conclude that the evidence does not establish such case, then it is not substantial evidence."”
    2 later decisions 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.