Mitchell v. Ringle’s Empirical Analysis
1898
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 1999
14 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 Lindley v. Kelley · Hervey v. Krost · Pence v. Armstrong · Thomas v. Simmons · Johnson v. Murray
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.
““It is clear that when the real estate sold by the sheriff on said decretal order was redeemed from such sale by Peter Ringle, the owner thereof, that such sale was wholly vacated as to said real estate and the same was subject to sale upon a decretal order for the payment of the sum unpaid, the same as if no sale had been made. . . . “After the redemption of said real estate appellant was entitled to an alias decretal order to make the balance due on said judgment and decree by the sale of the mortgaged property. An ordinary execution, how ever, was issued on said judgment and decree of foreclosure, and the property in controversy was sold thereon. ... “The judgment and decree were rendered as required by sections 1111, 1113 Burns’ R. S. 1894, (1097, 1099, R. S. 1881). The second sale of the mortgaged real estate, the one assailed by appellee, was made in all respects as required by the decree and the statute, except the writ on which the same was sold, which was in form, an ordinary execution instead of a copy of the order of sale and judgment. This was a mere irregularity. ...””
1 later decision 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.