Way v. Swift’s Empirical Analysis
1840
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
3
states following
November 1916
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is further objected that it is not alleged that the judgment, the recognizance, the intervening .damages, or additional costs remain unpaid. In 1 Chitty, Pl. 356, it is laid down that this allegation is unnecessary. See, also, Hancocke v. Prowd, 1 Saund. 330, note 4. If the judgment did not remain unsatisfied, it was matter of defense, and the defendant might have averred it in his plea.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dashley v. Daniel
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.