Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 139 A.2d 159 - Bata v. Hill

Bata v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
3
states following
November 1998
most recently cited

4 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 1998

4 district · 17 state decisions

9019581960197019801990decided

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 Cromwell v. County of Sac · Hilton v. Guyot · Baltimore Co v. Phillips · Schuylkill Fuel Corp. v. B. & C. Nieberg Realty Corp. · Evergreens v. Nunan

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

  1. ““Bata Matschapai Amsterdam 51,000 Hol.fl.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Clearly the Dutch court did not declare Jan to be the owner of the Dutch stock on the ground that the will created a sales legacy in his favor which he had accepted and which had been legally transferred to him. Rather, under its acquisitive prescription determination the court used its sales legacy determination as the basis for finding that Jan had a legal claim or title, a necessary element in determining that acquisitive prescription was present. However, Jan also had to prove rightful possession under that doctrine".”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"The Delaware corporations were created long after Thomas' death. It is agreed, however, that the ownership will follow, derivatively, the determination of ownership with respect to the Leader shares." Bata v. Hill, Del.Ch., 139 A.2d 159, 162 .”
    2 later decisions 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.