Bell v. Staacke’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

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

1. ““There is nothing in this point. The findings and conclusions of law were filed March 6, 1901, in due time, and on March 19, 1901, defendants gave their notice of intention to move for a new trial. Some two months after-wards the judge of thd lower court, on his own motion, and reciting that such findings had been inadvertently omitted, made and filed two additional findings upon two issues raised by the plaintiff’s answer to defendants’ cross-complaint. * * * These were in no way connected with the findings upon which the decree in favor of plaintiff was founded, and neither party attacks them, nor has either party appealed from, or questioned, this part of the decree.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States Oil & Land Co. v. Bell

2. ““The premature service of a notice of intention to move for a new trial, or a failure to serve such notice at all, might be a good reason for denying the motion, but does not deprive this court of jurisdiction to hear the appeal; nor does it constitute a reason for its dismissal upon the ground that the court has not jurisdiction to hear it. Hatters occurring prior to the order appealed from cannot be considered on the motion to dismiss an appeal.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States Oil & Land Co. v. Bell