Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 104 F.2d 222 - Ewald v. Lane

Ewald v. Lane’s Empirical Analysis

104 F.2d 222 · 1939

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
2
states following
October 1984
most recently cited

23 federal appellate · 8 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently October 1984 · most notably International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. National Labor Relations Board (1950), 138 Ohio St. 574 - Bigelow v. Brumley (1941)

23 federal appellate · 8 district · 5 state decisions

180193919401950196019701980decided

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 Thompson v. Thompson · Schubert v. August Schubert Wagon Co. · Koontz v. Messer & Quaker State Oil Refining Co. · Chase v. New Haven Waste Material Corporation · McLaurin v. McLaurin Furniture 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Married women shall have power * * * to sue separately * * * for torts committed against them, as fully and freely as if they were unmarried * *”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The perjured witness and the one who suborns him are joint tortfeasors, acting in conspiracy or combination *Page 590 to injure the party defamed. The fact that one of them is protected from a civil suit by a personal privilege does not exempt the other joint tortfeasor from such suit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““A cause of action ‘ “is not created by the conspiracy but by the wrongful acts done by the defendants to the injury of the plaintiffs.” ’ Ewald v. Lane, 70 App.D.C. 89, 90 , 104 F.2d 222, 223 .””
    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.