De Bobula v. Goss’s Empirical Analysis
193 F.2d 35 · 1951
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 1983 · most notably Halberstam v. Welch (1983), A. Ernest Fitzgerald v. Robert C. Seamans, Jr. (1977)
18 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 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 Portland Gold Mining Co. v. Stratton's Independence, Ltd. · Ewald v. Lane · Lazarov v. Arnold Schwinn & Co. · Adriaanse v. United States
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We think the District Court was right. The suit in the Municipal Court settled the question whether the owners of the property required it for their personal use. The appellant cannot, by alleging fraud, reopen that question in the District Court. “A judgment obtained by fraud or duress must be attacked in a direct proceeding, and not collaterally.” Nelson v. Felsing, 32 App.D.C. 420, 428 . As Judge Clagett said for the Municipal Court of Appeals in a similar case, the appellant is making a collateral attack on the judgment in the former suit, “and such collateral attacks are not permitted even on the ground of fraud, where the alleged fraud is a fraud which was in issue in that suit. Here, construing the complaint most favorably to appellant, the fraud suggested is that appellee misrepresented his purpose in desiring possession of the premises and thus acted in bad faith. That issue was decided in the prior suit and the decision may not be attacked collaterally.” Simpkins v. Brooks, D.C.Mun.App., 49 A.2d 549, 552 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““A cause of action ‘ “is not created by the conspiracy but by the wrongful acts done by the defendants to the injury of the plaintiffs.” ’ Ewald v. Lane, 70 App.D.C. 89, 90 , 104 F.2d 222, 223 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.