Burnside v. Wand’s Empirical Analysis
1902
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently November 1998 · most notably Aetna Insurance Co. v. Hyde (1931), Goffe v. National Surety Co. (1928)
5 federal appellate · 41 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 Young v. Young · State v. Jeffors · Belkin v. Rhodes · Exchange National Bank v. Allen · Jones v. Hart
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘A nunc pro tunc judgment, at a subsequent term, can only be made upon evidence furnished by the papers and files in the cause, or something of record, or in the clerk’s minute book or on the judge’s docket. In other words, a nunc pro tunc entry can only be employed to correct a clerical mistake or misprision of the clerk. It can never corrlect a mistake or oversight'of the judge nor be used to correct jtidicial errors, nor to render a judgment different from that actually rendered, even though the judgment actually rendered was not the judgment the judge intended to render.’ ””
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.