Gardner v. Howard’s Empirical Analysis
1923
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently October 1950 · most notably Combs v. Deaton (1923), Ramsey's v. Ramsey (1930)
2 federal appellate · 26 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 Wayne v. Brumley · Porter v. Eastern Ky. Asylum for Insane · Marion County v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad · City of Paducah v. Paducah Traction Co. · Bayne v. Stratton
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.
““It is necessary, before attempting a decision of the ultimate question at issue, to decide whether this is a direct attack upon the validity of the judgment ... or a collateral attack . . . since, if the former, no presumptions are to be indulged in favor of the judgment’s validity, and even the verity of the record upon which it was entered may be questioned: whereas, if the latter, the judgment is presumably valid, and will hot be declared void unless that fact affirmatively appears from the record. “The rule for determining whether an attack upon a judgment is direct or collateral is thus stated in Wayne v. Brumley, 190 Ky. 488 , 227 S. W. 996 : ‘A direct attack is an action or motion for the specific and only purpose of setting aside or annulling the judgment of a court; and any action which has for its purpose the accomplishment of any relief other than the setting aside of the judgment is not a direct attack.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ramsey's v. Ramsey““If the defendant be of unsound mind the summons must be served on him and on one of the following named persons, if residing in the county, viz.: On his committee; or, if he have no committee, on his father; or, if he have no father, on his guardian ; or, if he have no guardian, on his wife; or, if he have no wife, on the person having charge of him; or, if the defendant be a married woman of unsound mind, and her husband be plaintiff in the action, the summons must be served on her and ter committee; or, if her husband be not plaintiff in the action, upon her and her committee, if she have one; or if she have no committee, upon her and her husband: Provided, That the summons shall not be served upon a person of unsound mind, if he be under charge or treatment of a physician who certifies that, in his opinion, the service would be injurious to such person. Such certificate shall be returned with the summons.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ramsey's v. Ramsey““No rules are better settled in this state than that the power of a court to sell the land of a person under legal disability is purely statutory; that, unless the statute conferring the power is strictly followed, the sale is absolutely void; and that service of summons upon the owner, be he lunatic or infant, in the prescribed manner is a prerequisite to jurisdiction.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ramsey's v. Ramsey
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.