Reddington v. Rank’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently April 2008 · most notably City of Wichita v. Houchens (1959), Frost v. Hardin (1975)
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 City of Wichita v. Catino · Conrad v. Dillinger · Bankers Commercial Corp. v. Markl · Zimmerle v. Felzien
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . We do not mean to say a district court does not possess inherent discretionary power, independent of statute, to dismiss a case for want of prosecution, under circumstances warranting dismissal. We have held, absent abuse of discretion, the court has such power. (City of Wichita v. Catino, [ 175 Kan. 657 , 265 P. 2d 849 ],)” (p. 490.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Coutts v. Crider““. . . [I]t is highly important that the drastic procedure of dismissing an action involving rights of a citizen should be exercised with utmost care. . . .” (p. 490.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Logan v. McPhail
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.