Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 109 F.2d 291 - Thummess v. Von Hoffman

Thummess v. Von Hoffman’s Empirical Analysis

109 F.2d 291 · 1940

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
March 1985
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1985 · most notably Pfister v. Northern Illinois Finance Corp. (1942), Uranga v. Geib (1985)

13 federal appellate · 3 district ·

15019401950196019701980decided

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 Acme Harvester Company v. Beekman Lumber Company · Bate Refrigerating Co. v. Sulzberger · Thompson v. United States · Crim v. Woodford · Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Kelly

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

  1. ““The intent of the provision is to place a limitation upon the time within which an aggrieved person can, as a matter of right, file a petition for the review of a referee’s order, still leaving to the discretion of the court the allowance thereafter of permission to file such a petition * * * If it had been the legislative intent to restrict the court’s power in extending the time for filing to cases where action looking thereto is taken within the tep days * * * then Congress would have plainly so declared * * (Italics supplied.)”
    1 later decision 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.