Eberle v. Sinclair Prairie Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis
120 F.2d 746 · 1941
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably United States v. Silliman (1948), Funding Systems Leasing Corp. v. Pugh (1976)
16 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 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 Cain v. Quannah Light & Ice Co. · Bland v. Lawyer-Cuff Co. · Harn v. Interstate Bldg. & L. Co. · City of Wetumka v. Cromwell-Franklin Oil Co. · Safety Cab Co. v. Fair
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A person injured by a joint tort has a single and indivisible •cause of action. He may proceed against the wrongdoers either jointly or severally and may recover a judgment or judgments against all, but he can have but one satisfaction of his single cause of action. Neither may he split his cause of action. . . .” “The effect of the settlement and compromise of the cause of action, the receipt of the sum stipulated, the judgment approving the compromise of the causes of action, and dismissing the action with prejudice was an extinguishment of the two single causes of action. The causes of action having been extinguished, the district court of Seminole County, Oklahoma, was powerless to reserve the right in the administratrix to prosecute another suit on the same causes of action. ...””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““A person injured by a joint tort has a single and indivisible cause of action. He may proceed against the wrongdoers either jointly or severally and may recover a judgment or judgments against all, but he can have but one satisfaction of his sin~ gle cause of action. * * * ” (Emphasis added.)”
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.