Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 122 F.2d 697 - Van Sciver v. Rothensies

Van Sciver v. Rothensies’s Empirical Analysis

122 F.2d 697 · 1941

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
January 2000
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently January 2000

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

401941195019601970198019902000decided

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 Helvering v. Horst · Washington's Estate · Stranahan v. Commissioner · Rocks v. Sheppard · Long v. Metzger

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

  1. ““(d) Use of Depositions. At the trial or upon the hearing of a motion’ or an interlocutory proceeding, any part or all of a deposition, so far as admissible under the rules of evidence, may be used against any party who was present or represented at the taking of the deposition or who had due notice thereof, in accordance with any one of the following provisions: * * * “(3) The deposition of a witness, whether or not a party, may be used by any party for any purpose if the court finds: * * , that the witness is at a greater distance than 100 miles from the place of trial or hearing, or is out of the United States, unless it appears that the absence of the witness was procured by the party offering the deposition; * * *»”
    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.