Royall v. Peters’s Empirical Analysis
1942
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently April 2002
13 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 Pickeral v. Federal Land Bank · Hurley v. Bennett · Trevelyan's Adm'r v. Lofft · Downing v. Huston, Darbee Co. · Baker v. Watts
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There must at some time be an end to controversies. Courts are for the purpose of furnishing a speedy end to litigation and not as a forum for endless contentions. Carelessness or afterthought on the part of litigants ought not to be allowed to affect the conclusiveness of a proceeding which has been determined after ample opportunity for a hearing of every question which might have been litigated.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Carelessness or after-thought on the part of litigants ought not to be allowed to affect the conclusiveness of a proceeding which has been determined after ample opportunity for a_ hearing of every question which might have been litigated. (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Nuchols v. Marshall
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.