15 Mass. App. Ct. 757 - Guy v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 7 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently April 2010
5 federal appellate · 7 district · 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 Bartolozzi v. Mallegni · Richardson v. New York Central Railroad · 270 Pa. Super. 207 - Manning v. Capelli · Duzan v. Myers · Hurley v. Hurley
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the first clause of section 2 limits recovery to a class of persons. It provides for recovery of compensatory damages by 'the persons entitled to receive the damages recovered' and limits the class to those persons 'as provided in section .'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“can surmise that when [section] 2 was revised to introduce the compensatory principle of recovery, less than enough attention was paid to the compatibility of [section] 1.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(4) If there is no surviving wife or husband then to the use of the next of kin.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Spurling v. Johnson
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.