Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 157 Ind. App. 68 - Apple v. Apple

157 Ind. App. 68 - Apple v. Apple’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
April 2004
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 2004

9 state decisions

501973198019902000decided

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 Stephenson v. State · Fluty v. State · Cantwell v. Cantwell · State Ex Rel. McManamon v. Blackford Circuit Court · 156 Ind. App. 354 - Engelbrecht v. Property Developers, Inc.

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

  1. ““And Harold G. Barger as Special Judge herein being now sufficiently advised in the premises now enters finding and judgment for the defendants in error Floyd L. Apple and Floyd L. Apple as Executor of the Estate of Mary Rose Apple (Simmons) and Special Judge now enters finding and judgment against the plaintiffs in error and each of them, that the plaintiffs in error and each of them take nothing on their petition for writ of error coram nobis, that the same is now denied, new trial denied, costs against the Plaintiffs in error and each of them.””
    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.