Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 156 F.2d 464 - Hatten v. Vose

Hatten v. Vose’s Empirical Analysis

156 F.2d 464 · 1946

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
3
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 2019

2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

2019461950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Bosworth v. Terminal R Ass'n of St Louis · Pierpoint v. Hoyt · Cobbs v. Vizard Inv. Co. · Investment Registry, Ltd. v. Chicago & M. Electric R. · Smith v. Goodeagle Refining Co.

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

  1. ““A receiver may defend, both in the court appointing him and by appeal, the estate in his possession against all claims which are antagonistic to the rights of both parties [or] ... which are antagonistic to the rights of either party to the suit, subject to the limitation that he may not in such defense question any order or decree of the court distributing burdens or apportioning rights between the parties to the suit, or any order or decree resting upon the discretion of the court appointing him.””
    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.