Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 186 SO 863 - Carpenter v. Cox

Carpenter v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis

1938

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
January 1991
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 1991

2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

401938194019501960197019801990decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 275 · 26 U.S.C. § 311

Relies on Guillory v. Avoyelles Railway Co. · Brister v. Wray Dickinson Co. · De Bouchel v. Koss Const Co. · Hollingsworth v. Schanland · Brister v. Wray-Dickinson Co.

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

  1. ““ ‘A wide distinction exists between pure statutes of limitation and special statutory limitations qualifying a given right. In the latter instance time is made an essence of the right created and the limitation is an inherent part of the statute or agreement out of which the right in question arises, so that there is no right of action whatever independent of the limitation. A lapse of the statutory period operates, therefore, to extinguish the right altogether. * * * They are not subject to the disabilities and excuses through which the effect of ordinary statutes of limitation may be avoided, nor, it seems, can they be evaded even by proof of fraud. Whether a particular limitation of time is to be regarded as a part of the general statute of limitations or as a qualification of a particular right must be determined from the language employed and from the connection in which it is used.” See also, 53 C.J. S. Limitations of Actions § 1.”
    2 later decisions 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.