Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 115 R.I. 144 - Armstrong v. Armstrong

Armstrong v. Armstrong’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
November 2013
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently November 2013

14 state decisions

6019751980199020002010decided

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 Martin v. Estrella · Edward v. City of Newport · In Re Shannon

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

  1. ““we adhere to the standard used in granting extensions of time for transmission of the record. As provided in Supreme Court Rule 11(c), such motions are not granted without a showing ‘* * * that the inability of the appellant to cause timely transmission of the record is due to causes beyond his control or to circumstances which may be deemed excusable neglect.’ ” Id. (Emphasis added.)”
    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.