Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 17 F.2d 716 - Hewitt v. Hewitt

Hewitt v. Hewitt’s Empirical Analysis

17 F.2d 716 · 1927

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
7
states following
June 2008
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 2008

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 state decisions

50192719301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 United States v. Throckmorton · Marshall v. Holmes · Laun v. Kipp · Diamond v. Connolly · Diamond v. Connolly

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

  1. ““But there is an admitted exception to this general rule in cases where, by reason of something done by the successful party to a suit, there was in fact no adversary trial or decision of the issue in the ease. Where the unsuccessful party has been prevented from exhibiting fully his case, by fraud or deception practiced on him by his opponent, as by keeping him away from court, a false promise of a compromise; or where the defendant never had knowledge of the suit, being kept in ignorance by the acts of the plaintiff; or where an attorney fraudulently or without authority assumes to represent a party and connives at his defeat; or where the attorney regularly employed corruptly sells out his client’s interest to the other side — these, and similar cases, which show that there has never been a real contest in the trial or hearing of the case, are reasons for which a new suit may be sustained to set aside and annul the former judgment or decree, and open the case for a new and a fair hearing.” This case, we think, falls within the exception, and not within the general rule. Here the appellant was prevented from presenting a claim for his portion of the estate by the fraudulent conduct of the administratrix, and there has been no adversary trial or decision of any issue as between the parties to the present suit. The appellees frankly concede that, if the appellant had been prevented from making claim to the estate because of some fraudulent statement or misrepresentation on th”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““She made no inquiry for the adopted son, at his last known place of address or elsewhere, and maintained silence solely because of the hearsay statement made to her by her husband some years before. Had she communicated all of these facts to the court, it is not at all likely that a decree of distribution would have been entered without directing further investigation or inquiry — at least we have a right to so presume. Nor will we speculate as to what might have happened, had she pursued the proper course.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““ ‘There is no written law placing a limit upon the power of equity to remedy and redress wrongs, neither is there any want of power in that regard in the written law. It is the crowning merit of our system that, so far as power is concerned, it is as limitless as the capacity of man to wrong a fellow man.’ ” Laun v. Kipp, 155 Wis. 347 , 145 N.W. 183 , 5 A.L.R. 655 , quoted in Hewitt v. Hewitt, 9 Cir., 17 F.2d 716, 718 .”
    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.