Mitchell v. Hines’s Empirical Analysis
1924
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently January 1984
11 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 Consolidated Steel & Wire Co. v. Burnham, Hanna, Munger & Co. · Piper v. Choctaw Northern Townsite & Improvement Co. · Lewis v. Bandy · Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. McCulley · Lusk, Receivers v. Henson
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Amendments to pleadings are largely within the discretion of the trial court. To authorize a reversal of a judgment because an amendment was not allowed, it must appear that there was an abuse of judicial discretion.””
3 later decisions 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.