Withrow v. Schou’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently February 2020
10 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 Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc. · Weigner v. City of New York · Farhoud v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Norman Communications v. Texas Eastman Co. · Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Rogers
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t is implicit in Rule 8 that an attorney in charge is responsible for notifying the court and opposing counsel of any change in [the attorney's] address immediately and certainly before any address forwarding order has expired.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Citing Rule 21a’s provision that notice may be sent to a party’s last known address, the court of appeals held that litigants have a duty “to keep the court and parties apprised of their correct and current address.” Not all courts of appeals appear to agree. But even assuming there is such a duty, unless noncompliance was intentional rather than a mistake, due process requires some lesser sanction than trial without notice or an opportunity to he heard.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ashworth v. Brzoska“>id. Though the Withrow court concluded that the trial court clerk acted reasonably in mailing notice of the trial setting to appellant's counsel of record”
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.