Funk v. Wingert’s Empirical Analysis
1919
Citation profile
6 district · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Buxton v. Buxton (2001), 47 Md. App. 202 - Decker v. Fink (1980)
6 district · 30 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 Crook v. Glenn · Keating v. Michigan Central Railroad · Bourne v. Hall
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) Such a construction leaves that clause without any real meaning, because a lunatic, or infant, is never under disability to sue substantially in the way he can sue after the appointment of a committee or guardian. “ (2) The mere disability to sue was not, in our opinion, the only reason for the saving clause. It might well happen that facts necessary to maintain a suit could be proved only by the lunatic, or that information as to witnesses could be furnished only by him. “It seems clear to us that the disability meant by the Legislature was the general disability of lunacy or infancy as to the care of property and the safeguarding of rights.””
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.