Klamm Shell v. Berg’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently May 1995 · most notably People v. Wiedemer (1993), City of Aurora v. Bechtel Corp. (1979)
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 28 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 Rosane v. Senger · Kyle v. Green Acres at Verona, Inc. · Warren v. Adams · Browne v. Smith
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To uphold the defendant’s contention in this case would, in our view, be unconscionable and would violate basic equitable concepts, which may be invoked by trial courts when confronted with facts which impel equitable treatment. Under the facts here presented, we hold that equity contains within its purview overriding concepts which proclaim that a defendant on the basis of plain justice should not be allowed to rely on a statute of limitations, where his intentional tort has caused mental incapacity arising after the cause of action accrued but before the expiration of the period of limitation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“rather than promoting justice, the statute of limitations would then become an effective instrument for injustice. When this situation occurs, trial courts properly may ... fashion an equitable exception to the statutory limitation period.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“enacted for the purpose of promoting justice, discouraging unnecessary delay and forestalling the prosecution of stale claims, not for the benefit of the negligent.”
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.