Wolfe v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis
172 F.2d 481 · 1949
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2023 · most notably United States v. Maestas (1975), Norvell v. Sangre de Cristo Development Co. (1975)
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 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 Lone Wolf v. Ethan a Hitchcock · Terry v. Anderson · Jeannie Wilson v. Adam Iseminger H · Winton v. Amos · McGahey v. State of Virginia
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.
““A state may constitutionally shorten the periods of limitations fixed by previously existing statutes and make the amended statute applicable to existing causes of action, provided it affords a reasonable time within which suits for such * * * causes may be commenced. What is a reasonable time is for the determination of the Legislature, and the court will not interfere with the legislative discretion unless the time allowed is so manifestly insufficient that it amounts to a denial of justice. See. 93 as amended, set out in note 3, provided ‘that where any such action pertains to real estate sold * * * pursuant to partition proceedings 'i:' * * and would at the passage of this Act be barred by the terms hereof, such action may be brought within one (1) year alter' the passage of this Act.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It will be observed that § 2 of the Act of April 12, 1926 set out in Note 3, provides that the statutes of limitations of the State of Oklahoma shall be applicable to and shall have full force and effect against all restricted Indians of the Five Civilized Tribes and against their heirs or grantees, to the same extent and effect and in the same manner as in the case of any other citizen of the State of Oklahoma, and may be pleaded in bar of any action brought by any such Indian, his heirs or grantees, or by the United States or any other party for the benefit of such Indian, his heirs or grantees, to the same extent as though such action were brought by or on behalf of any other citizen of such state.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Haggard v. Studie“A state may constitutionally shorten the periods of limitation fixed by previously existing statutes and make the amended statute applicable to existing causes of action, provided it affords a reasonable time within which suits for such existing causes of action may be commenced.”
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.