Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 120 MICH 377 - Blackman v. Simpson

Blackman v. Simpson’s Empirical Analysis

1899

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
4
states following
March 1986
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1986

1 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

401899190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Livingston v. Bishop · Thompson v. Ellsworth

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

  1. ““The authorities are not agreed whether the bringing of a suit against one will prevent bringing a second suit against others. Some of them hold the bringing of the first suit is an election, which will preclude the bringing of other suits. See 2 Black, Judgm. § 780. Justice Kent stated the rule to be that the party injured may bring separate suits against the wrong-doers, and proceed to judgment in each, and that no bar arises as to any of them until satisfaction is received. Livingston v. Bishop, 1 Johns. (N. Y.) 290 ( 3 Am. Dec. 330 ). This is the prevailing doctrine in this country. Cooley, Torts (2d Ed.), 159.””
    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.