Zaro v. Strauss’s Empirical Analysis
167 F.2d 218 · 1948
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably Hoffert v. General Motors Corp. (1981), Roberts v. Ohio Casualty Insurance (1958)
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 11 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 Olivera v. Grace · McDaniel v. McElvy
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he court shall appoint a guardian ad litem for an ... incompetent person not otherwise represented in an action or shall make such other order as it deems proper for the protection of the ... incompetent person.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““* * * If, as the answer set up, defendant had been adjudged insane by a court of competent jurisdiction, no further step should have been taken without service upon her guardian if one had been appointed in Ohio and was present within the jurisdiction of the court in Florida; or, if the guardian was not in Florida or if no Ohio guardian had been appointed, upon a guardian ad litem thereupon appointed by the court in Florida. This was required under § 47.25, Fla.Stat.Ann. as a prerequisite to the acquisition by the court of general jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Drake v. Wimbourne“while the judgment rendered was not null as one rendered entirely without jurisdiction, it was voidable upon a showing such as has been made here that defendant had a meritorious defense and was not properly represented in the action.”
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.