Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 149 F.2d 84 - Gross v. Williams

Gross v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

149 F.2d 84 · 1945

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
6
states following
May 2015
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently May 2015

5 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

6019451950196019701980199020002010decided

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 50 U.S.C. § 3901 (Servicemembers Civil Relief Act) · 50 U.S.C. § 3931 (Servicemembers Civil Relief Act)

Relies on Boone v. Lightner · Stolte v. Larkin · Chicago, St. P., M. & O. Ry. Co. v. Muldowney · United States v. De Armond

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

  1. ““At any stage thereof any action or proceeding in any court in which a person in military service is involved, either as plaintiff or defendant, during the period of such service or within sixty days thereafter may, in the discretion of the court in which it is pending, on its own motion, and shall, on application to it by such person or some person on his behalf, be stayed as provided in this Act (sections 501-548 and 560-590 of this Appendix), unless, in the opinion of the court, the ability of plaintiff to prosecute the action or the defendant to conduct his defense is not materially affected by reason of his military service. Oct. 17, 1940, c. 888, § 201, 54 Stat. 1181 .””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The mere fact of service in the armed forces of the United States does not entitle a party to a stay of proceedings against him as a matter of right. The trial court may and should deny the stay when it is apparent that the party absent in the military service will not be materially prejudiced by the trial of the case. Boone v. Lightner, 319 U.S. 561 , 63 S.Ct. 1223 , 87 L.Ed. 1587 . Under the record in this case we can not say that the discretion of the trial court was erroneously exercised.”
    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.