Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 126 N.M. 288 - Crumpacker v. DeNaples

Crumpacker v. DeNaples’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
3
states following
April 2017
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably Roark v. Farmers Group, Inc. (2007), Moody v. Stribling (1999)

32 state decisions

180199820002010decided

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

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 541 · 11 U.S.C. § 554

Relies on Foman v. Davis · Schmitz v. Smentowski · Koenig v. Perez · Marchman v. NCNB Texas National Bank · Las Luminarias of the New Mexico Council of the Blind v. Isengard

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

  1. “Relation back of amendments. Whenever the claim or defense asserted in the amended pleading arose out of the conduct, transaction or occurrence set forth or attempted to be set forth in the original pleading, the amendment relates back to the date of the original pleading. An amendment changing the party against whom a claim is asserted relates back if the foregoing provision is satisfied and, within the period provided by law for commencing the action against him, the party to be brought in by amendment: (1) has received such notice of the institution of the action that he will not be prejudiced in maintaining his defense on the merits; and (2) knew or should have known that, but for a mistake concerning the identity of the proper party, the action would have been brought against him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Where it appears that an action, by reason of honest mistake, is not prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest, the court may allow a reasonable time for ratification of commencement of the action by, or joinder or substitution of, the real party in interest; and such ratification, joinder or substitution shall have the same effect as if the action had been commenced in the name of the real party in interest.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “`party against whom a claim is asserted. '”
    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.