121 W. Va. 537 - Moore v. Pyles’s Empirical Analysis
1939
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
April 1979
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Handy v. Scott, Baker & Co. · Barbour v. Tompkins · Laidley v. Kline · Irvin v. Stover · Stevens v. Brown
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where a statute provides a remedy, a party litigant is not at liberty to proceed in any other way. The orderly conduct of litigation will not permit a departure from this rule, [citations omitted]. Whatever remedy plaintiff had was pro vided by Code, 56-8-12. Having failed to petition for the reinstatement of the case as provided by this section of the Code, they cannot transform this case into such a petition.... Having let three terms of court lapse without sufficient explanation, the elements of fraud or other sufficient grounds not being 'present in the record, surely plaintiffs are not entitled to reinstatement here-” Id. at 541-42 , 5 S.E.2d at 447 (1939) (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.